beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of the lower court against Defendant A (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence of the court below against the prosecutor (the defendant A: six months of imprisonment, the suspended sentence of two years, the defendant B: the imprisonment of six months) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. Defendant A’s crime of this case is deemed to be strictly punished in light of the following: (a) as the Defendant would purchase a heavy vehicle in order to distribute it to so-called “spool”; (b) deceiving the victim to take over a heavy vehicle from the victim; and (c) making a forgery of an application for a heavy loan or making it possible to use the certificate of automobile transfer by forging the application for the heavy loan; and (d) the nature of the crime is very poor.
However, in full view of the fact that the defendant did not have any history of punishment for the same crime, the degree of participation in the crime of this case is not significant, [2014 high group 2370] In the case of the case, the damaged vehicle sold by the large lane was seized and returned to the victim. [14 high group 6623] In the case of the case, the document in the name of the mother or the false representation is forged, the defendant's mistake is divided, and other various sentencing conditions as well as the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the punishment imposed by the court below is too heavy or too unreasonable.
Therefore, Defendant A and Prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.
B. Defendant B committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution due to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective injury with a deadly weapon, etc.) and the instant crime was committed by deceiving the victims as if the Defendant would purchase a heavy vehicle in order to distribute it to the so-called so-called so-called “spool,” thereby taking over the vehicle from the victims or purchasing the vehicle in the name of the victims, and then taking the advantage of it.