logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.10.26 2017노2862
전기통신금융사기피해방지및피해금환급에관한특별법위반등
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit by the court below shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The reason for the appeal by the prosecutor is that it is the reason for the appeal by the defendant that the punishment prescribed by the court of the original instance (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable, and that it is too unreasonable due to it.

2. The judgment seems to have led to the confession and reflect on the crime.

The actual damage of KRW 100 million was caused by the base of the damaged person.

There is no criminal record for the same kind of crime, and only one fine is a crime.

There is also a situation in which relatives and their neighbors appeal their wife.

However, the criminal liability of the defendant is not against the law.

The degree of participation in the crime was not insignificant, and the long-term escape was avoided.

Although the summary order of fines has become final and conclusive, the sentencing results of the accomplice of this case should not be narrowly considered.

It is necessary to take into account the harm of the phishing crime and the equality of many similar sentencing cases.

The court of the court below rendered the sentence against the defendant by taking account of the aforementioned various positive and negative circumstances.

The judgment below

There is no new circumstance that can be considered in sentencing as a result of the sentence.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy, and it is not deemed unfair.

3. In conclusion, the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor are not reasonable, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

According to Articles 191(1), 190(1), and 186(1) main text of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is right that the defendant bears the costs of lawsuit in the original judgment.

It is the cost of the defense counsel at the court below's request of the defendant who was in a non-detained trial.

There is no description of the text and reasons for the burden of litigation costs.

arrow