beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Each sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 2 months) declared by the court below against the Defendants is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant C did not conspired to commit a crime of conflict with Co-Defendant B, and the Defendant sent a victim’s text message, but the content of the message did not constitute a crime of complete payment of money. However, the lower court found Defendant C guilty of the lower judgment erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine.
2. Determination
A. We examine the judgment of the defendants A and B on the unfair argument of sentencing, the defendants recognized all the crimes of this case when they were in the first instance, the defendants did not have any record of punishment for the same crime, the defendants B did not have any record of criminal punishment except once a fine is imposed on them, and the defendants were to commit the crime of conflict of interest in this case in the course of exercising their rights to own stocks, and there are some circumstances that may be somewhat taken into account in the circumstance, etc., as favorable to the above defendants.
However, the crime of the conflict of this case was committed by the defendants, which held the shares of the company operated by the victim as the representative director (hereinafter "the company of this case"), and by threatening the victim to the effect that the company of this case did not obtain permission from the competent authority in relation to the distribution and sale of gas and by threatening the victim to know it to the press. In light of the content and method of the crime, the nature of the crime was significant; in the case of the defendant A, the amount of damage was KRW 320,000,000,000,000,000 won, and in the case of the defendant B, the amount of damage was not reached; the defendants did not reach an agreement with the victim or did not recover damage to the victim; and the defendants actually did not make the shares of the company of this case.