logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.13 2016노3557
사기
Text

We reverse the judgment of the first instance court.

Defendant

Defendants A, B, and C shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and two months, by imprisonment for one year, and Defendant E.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence sentenced by the first instance court (defendant A and B: 3 years of imprisonment) against Defendant A and B (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing) 1) The Defendant, upon request of AO, merely provided a pre-contract guidance phone on the date of counseling related to the loan, and did not belong to the instant Bophishing organization and did not act as a telephone inducement. Thus, the Defendant did not bear a principal offender’s criminal liability for the instant crime.

2) The sentence sentenced by the first instance court (three years of imprisonment) for the sentencing is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

D (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing) 1) The Defendant entered the Philippines around November 8, 2012, but actually started to play a role of inducing the call of Bosing from December 3, 2012. As such, even if a public offering joint principal offender is recognized in a successive manner, a crime liability should be recognized regarding the sequence 877 through 2679 out of the list of crimes committed by the Defendant.

2) The sentence sentenced by the first instance court (two years of imprisonment) for the sentencing is too unreasonable.

(d)

Defendant

E( 사실 오인 내지 법리 오해, 양형 부당) 1) 사실 오인 내지 법리 오해 피고인이 베트남에 머물던 총 3 주간의 기간 중 적극적으로 범행행위에 가담하겠다는 의사에서 행동한 적이 없었고 마지막 1주 동안에는 최소한으로 전화를 거는 시늉만 했던 점, 실제로 보이스 피 싱의 전화 유인책으로서 피해자들에게 전화를 하여 대화를 한 적이 없었고 피고인의 행위로 어떠한 피해자가 발생한 것도 아니었으므로, 사기의 고의도 없었고 공동 정범의 죄책을 부담하지 않는다.

2) The sentence sentenced by the first instance court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

E. Each sentence (Defendant D: 2 years of imprisonment; Defendant E: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months) sentenced by the first instance court (unfair sentencing for Defendant D and E) is too unhued.

arrow