beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.
Defendant.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for six months and one year of suspended execution) of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant is a situation unfavorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) the Defendant conspireds with the defraudeds of loan funds in a systematic manner by abusing the fact that the loan of money for lease on a deposit basis is not strict in the course of lending examination and recovery as a guarantee by the Korea Housing Finance Corporation; and (b) the nature of the crime is not good; and (c) the Defendant’s occurrence of substantial damage to ordinary people by resolving the problem of public funds by the Korea Housing Finance Corporation.
However, the defendant led to his confession of the crime of this case and divided his mistake. In the crime of this case, the defendant is in charge of a lessor's role and the degree of participation is relatively minor and the defendant seems to be merely a part of the amount actually distributed due to the crime of this case. The defendant was the first offender who has no criminal record, the defendant was trying to recover from damage by depositing the victim bank as the other party of the victim bank in the trial, and the defendant was employed as the defendant as the defendant in the defendant's life insurance contract for Kim Jong-ju, and the imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment is finalized in the standard of disciplinary action. If the defendant's punishment becomes final and conclusive in the standard of disciplinary action, the disciplinary action standard shall be defined as "recognition". If the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means, result, etc. of the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character, means, and circumstances before and after the crime of this case are considered to be accompanied by excessive difficulty for his family members, and considering various sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.
Therefore, the defendant's argument is justified.