beta
Text
The judgment below
The remainder, excluding the dismissed part of the prosecution against Defendant A, shall be reversed.
Defendant
A.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal against the Defendants (e.g., imprisonment of two years, imprisonment of one year and six months, imprisonment of one year and one year and eight months, and fine of five hundred thousand won) are too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the defendant A has the record of being sentenced to imprisonment or a fine several times for the same crime; the defendant C has the record of being punished for the suspension of execution due to the same crime; the defendants assaulted the victim J and K with beer disease, which is a dangerous object, and thereby, there is a need to strictly punish the defendants in light of the risk of the form of the crime of injury in this case, such as the victims' serious injury, and the seriousness of the result thereof; the defendant C operated without a license condition to drive the vehicle in order to cause the accident and escape from the vehicle, and led other persons to confession, thereby inducing the escape of the crime, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendants.
However, according to the circumstances leading up to the crime of this case, it is necessary for the victim J to take into account the following circumstances: (a) the victim J used the toilet for a long time; (b) the victim J and K applied for the fighting of this case; (c) the victims want to take the fighting; (d) Defendant C agreed with the Dongbu Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., which is the victim of the fraud of this case; (c) the Defendants seems to be against their wrongness during the period of detention corresponding to six months; and (d) the Defendants appear to be in profoundly taking into account all the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is somewhat unreasonable, and thus, the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.
3. According to the conclusion, the Defendants’ appeal is with merit, and thus, the lower court’s judgment pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.