2020Do2551 A. Fraud

(b) Alteration of an official document;

(c) Exercising altered official documents;

(d) Fraud prevention;

1.(a)(c) B

2. D. J

Defendants

Law Firm Dongin (Defendant B)

[Defendant, Appellant] The Head of Si/Gun/Gu

1. M;

2. FL;

Suwon District Court Decision 2019No2430 decided Feb. 7, 2020 and 2019 initially decided Feb. 7, 2020

173, 2020 seconds66 Application for a compensation order

May 14, 2020

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Judgment on Defendant B’s grounds of appeal

According to the records, Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal. In such a case, the allegation that the judgment of the court below erred by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In principle, the progress of the trial proceedings and the adoption of the application for examination of evidence belong to the court's discretion. Thus, even if the court below rejected Defendant B's application for resumption of pleadings, it cannot be deemed that the court below erred by infringing on Defendant B's right of defense.

Examining various circumstances, such as Defendant B’s age, character and conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for up to 11 years cannot be deemed as extremely unfair even in light of the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

2. Judgment on Defendant J’s ground of appeal

According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing shall be allowed. Therefore, in this case where Defendant J rendered a minor sentence, the argument that punishment is too unreasonable shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Ki-taik

Justices Kwon Soon-il

Justices Park Jung-hwa

Justices Kim Jong-soo