beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although the Defendant did not have sold philophones to C, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 403,00) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court erred in its determination and determination on the facts, as it found that the Defendant sold phiphones to C as stated in the facts constituting the crime.
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.
C around 21:28 on the day of the instant crime, around 21:28, the Defendant remitted KRW 350,000 to the Defendant (in the name of the Defendant’s mother, transferred the money to the account in the name of the Defendant’s father, and transferred the money to two books of evidence No. 81 of the record No. 2 of the evidence record). As to the reasons for the Defendant’s receipt of the money above, the police, as long as there was no certain amount of income from the Defendant’s release from the police, she dump
A statement was made (Evidence 2 Book 40, 42, 84 page 40, 42, 84 page) and the prosecutor's office made a situation that C contacted the defendant and sought a penphone, but the defendant did not have to seek a penphone.
N. D. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. C
A statement was made (Evidence No. 112 of the Evidence No. 2 Book No. 1 of the Evidence No. 1), and a statement made by C that C would be explained about C’s telephone call again means that C would not have a philopon (the Defendant would have a philopon) to lend money to C (Evidence No. 113 of the Evidence No. 2 Book No. 1 of the Evidence No. 2 of the Record). In addition, the Defendant submitted to the court of original instance on Sept. 4, 2017; and the reason for appeal on Nov. 20, 2017, “C is under the influence of alcohol.”