logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.06.02 2016노2712
사기등
Text

The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

The punishment against A shall be two years and ten months.

Reasons

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court to the Defendants is too unreasonable as the gist of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. There is no significant change in circumstances after the judgment of the court below regarding the defendants B, C, and J's unfair argument of sentencing.

In light of the records of this case and the reasoning of the lower judgment’s sentencing, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair, even if the Defendants asserted on the grounds of appeal in light of all the circumstances alleged on the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, the defendants' argument of sentencing is not accepted.

B. We examine the judgment ex officio prior to the judgment of the defendant A on the unfair argument of sentencing.

Defendant

Since each crime of the judgment of the court below against A is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one of the concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act should be sentenced within the scope of the term of punishment subject to aggravated punishment.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. Conclusion, Defendant B, C, and J’s appeal is rejected, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Defendant

The two judgment of the court below against A is reversed ex officio in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant A's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio, and the following is again decided after pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence against Defendant A recognized by this court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the two judgment below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 232-2 of the Criminal Act and Articles 234 and 232-2 of the Criminal Act (such as the electronic records, etc. of the company), Article 347(1) (a) and Articles 352 and 347(1) (a) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts.

arrow