beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.
Defendant
C.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to Defendant A1’s mistake of facts, Defendant C did not have any assertion that Defendant C has a claim of KRW 3-40 million against Defendant A, and there is no reason for Defendant A to compel Defendant C to act on his own. 2) The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing decision (one-year imprisonment) by the lower court is too heavy.
B. Defendant C’s sentence (2 million won of fine) is too heavy.
2. Determination
A. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts. In particular, according to the consistent testimony at the lower court and the first instance court, the Defendant A may sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant A instigated the Defendant C to make a false accusation against himself/herself as stated in the lower court’s decision. Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendant A is without merit. 2) As to the assertion of unreasonable sentencing, the sum obtained by the Defendant A reaches KRW 1.3 million in total.
Defendant
A, as a crime of fraud, has committed another crime of fraud during the repeated period.
However, Defendant A recognized all of the remaining crimes except that of an unqualified teacher, and agreed with the victim Y and AO in the first instance trial following the repayment of KRW 30 million to the victim P in the lower trial.
In addition, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, considering all the factors of sentencing prescribed by Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as Defendant A's age and character and behavior.
Defendant
A's assertion in this part is with merit.
B. As to Defendant C, Defendant C made confessions of and reflects all of his own crimes, and the fact that the instant crime is in the concurrent relationship between the separate crimes finalized around December 22, 2012 and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is an element for sentencing favorable to the Defendant.
On the other hand, the defendant has the same criminal records.
And the crime of false accusation is a violation of the legal safety of the state judicial body at the same time.