beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. On June 8, 2017, the Defendant’s defense counsel at the lower court’s trial scope of this Court submitted a petition of appeal stating the following: “The Defendant filed an appeal on the grounds of mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles”; on June 20, 2017, a notice of receipt of court records was served on the Defendant; and on July 18, 2017, the Defendant lodged an appeal on the grounds of mistake of facts and illegality of sentencing in this court.
The reason for appeal is only stated, and no reason for appeal has been submitted.
In this regard, the argument that the “misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of the legal principles” as stated in the petition of appeal is insufficient to find out, solely by itself, what legal principles were erroneous in relation to deception, and what the specific grounds alleged to be erroneous in the judgment below cannot be limited to the scope of the judgment in the appellate
However, the argument of "unfair sentencing" stated in the petition of appeal itself is clear that the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy, and thus, it becomes a legitimate ground for appeal.
Therefore, the lower court’s determination that recognized the entire facts charged as a crime of fraud is justifiable, and there is no error of misunderstanding or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the Defendant, even though the lower court’s assertions that the Defendant was erroneous in the scope of the appellate court’s judgment, based on the evidence duly examined by the lower court, that the Defendant deceivings each victim, and that each victim gave money to the Defendant by deceiving the said deception, and thus, the lower court’s determination that recognized the entire facts charged as a crime of fraud is justifiable.
3. In full view of all the sentencing conditions stated in the records of the instant case, such as the favorable or unfavorable circumstances of the Defendant, and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is appropriate and there is no change in the sentencing grounds.
Therefore, the defendant-appellant.