beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.
3.2
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A’s sentence (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for eight months, and 80 hours of community service order) imposed by the lower court against the above Defendant is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s sentence (three million won of fine) imposed on Defendant C is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing, an insurance fraud crime is disadvantageous to the fact that there is a significant social harm, and Defendant A committed a crime under the lead of Defendant A, since it could impose multiple good insurance policy holders on damage.
On the other hand, there is no record that Defendant A recognized the instant crime and against the mistake, there is no significant punishment exceeding the same kind of crime or the suspended execution, Defendant A is not an offense to obtain the economic benefit of the principal, and the crime is committed against the attempted crime.
In light of the above various circumstances and the overall conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments and records, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is unreasonable.
Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion is justified.
B. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing against Defendant C by the prosecutor, an insurance fraud crime is disadvantageous to a large number of good insured members, and there is a great social harm.
However, Defendant C recognized the instant crime and divided it, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the same kind of crime or the suspension of execution, Defendant C actively participated in the instant crime as the victim of the traffic accident, and the fact that the crime was committed in the attempted crime is favorable to Defendant C.
In addition, the lower court’s sentence against Defendant C is too excessive in light of the following factors: Defendant C’s age, character and conduct, and the result of the crime.