beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
Reasons
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
The punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
Judgment
In full view of the fact that the defendant deposited a total of KRW 117,840,000 for the interest of victims in the court below and the party court, the sentence of the court below is unreasonable.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.
In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are all the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 40 of the Subsidy Management Act (the point of fraudulent receipt);
1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;
1. The reasons for the sentencing of selective punishment of imprisonment are as follows: (a) the Defendant deposited KRW 70 million in the court below for the interest of the victim; (b) deposited the additional KRW 4784,00 in the court below for the interest of the victim; and (c) opened the money in the court below; (c) opened the money obtained by the Defendant from the interest of the victim; (d) divided and reflects the error; (e) the amount of the money obtained by the Defendant from the interest of the victim; (e) the amount of the national subsidy exceeds KRW 270,000,000; and (e) around 200, the amount of the money obtained by the State subsidy exceeds KRW 180,000; and (e) the facts constituting the crime of which subsidies were illegally received in connection with the business of the Gabbbatha in the instant case, around January 10, 200; and (e) again committed the crime of this case even after being sentenced two years of suspended sentence, taking into account all the records as indicated in the order.