beta
Text
All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
Defendant
A The second-B crime and the second-B judgment of the court below in the judgment of the court of first instance.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Since the defendant's participation in the crime is not recognized with respect to damage that occurred during a period of time when the defendant was staying in Korea, the crime of fraud is established only for the remaining amount except for such part.
B. The sentencing of the lower court (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes set forth in Articles 1 and 2(a) and 2(b) of the judgment of the lower court; imprisonment for the crimes set forth in Articles 1 and 2(b) of the judgment of the lower court; imprisonment for 4 months; imprisonment for the crimes set forth in Articles 1 and 5 through 22 of the list of crimes set forth in the judgment of the lower court; imprisonment for 1 year; imprisonment for the crimes set forth in Articles 5 and 22 of the list of crimes set forth in the judgment of the lower court; imprisonment for 5 years; imprisonment for 5 years; imprisonment for 1 year and 2 months; Defendant C; imprisonment for 1 - 3 years and 6 months; and imprisonment for 2 months)
2. The judgment of this court ex officio rendered a concurrent hearing of each appeal against the judgment below. Since each of the offenses of the judgment below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one sentence should be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.
The judgment of the court below cannot be maintained in its entirety.
Although the judgment of the court below has such reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant B's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of the court, and this is examined below.
3. Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts regarding Defendant B cannot serve as a legitimate ground for appeal due to a new argument after the expiration of the period for submitting the grounds for appeal.
According to the evidence examined by the court below, even if the above defendant was temporarily staying in Korea during the middle of the period of crime, it can be recognized that the above defendant did not leave the relation of conspiracy completely, but he was involved in the crime continuously with China and Korea. Thus, the above amount obtained by deception during that period.