beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
Defendant of the Prosecutor.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) Since the amount paid to Defendant A to the effect that Defendant A paid directly to the victim D and H or delivered to the above victims is KRW 72.2 million, the above amount should be excluded from the amount obtained by deceitation of the crime. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that Defendant A obtained a total of KRW 150 million from the above victims, and acquired it by deceit, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts. 2) The sentence (one year and two months of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing against Defendant A is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence that the court below sentenced the Defendants (one year and two years of suspended sentence in the imprisonment of one year and two years of suspended sentence in the imprisonment of six months) is too uneasable and unfair.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the defendant A's assertion of mistake, i.e., (i) all of the facts charged at the investigative agency and the court below; (ii) at the time when the defendant A received the money as stated in this part of the facts charged, the Macar bank account of the defendant A was deposited with the victim D and H; and (iii) the defendant A did not notify the above victims of such circumstance although the F brought about the amount of KRW 150 million of the refunded money of the defendant A; and (iv) the defendant A received KRW 150 million from the above victims and received KRW 150 million from the above victims before receiving it, and had already been delivered KRW 50 million from the victim H as investments, but failed to repay it, as alleged in this part of the facts charged, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant A acquired the money from the above victims after the fact.