beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
C Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months, and Defendant E shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of six months.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel (unlawful in sentencing) is unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendants did not reclaim in the workplace wastes as they were, and buried soil by mixing them with earth and sand at a rate consistent with the recycling standards set forth in the Waste Management Act; (b) the Defendants did not have a significant impact on the soil environment; (c) the profits earned from each of the instant crimes were low; (d) the Defendants buried in an inorganic sludge and restored the land to its original state; and (e) when the Defendants were detained, the Defendants’ termination of their livelihood is very difficult for their family members and employees to maintain the livelihood.
2. In the judgment of the court below, the defendants were aware of all the facts of the crime, and they are against the wrong facts. The defendant C recovered from all the land of AA, C, AB, AC, AD, AE, AE, AF, AH, and AI in the event that the defendant C buried the inorganic sludge, and the land of SP was restored to its original state in collusion with the defendant C, and the benefits accrued from each of the crimes of this case were relatively large. In full view of the defendants' age, sex, sex, environment, motive, consequence, and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, and all of the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the above arguments are justified. Thus, the above arguments are without merit.
3. As the Defendants’ appeal is reasonable, the lower judgment is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment is rendered again following the pleadings.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts charged by the Defendants and the summary of the evidence are as stated in each corresponding column of the lower judgment, and thus, all of them are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;
A. Defendant C’s judgment from April 1, 2013 to July 15, 2013