본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
광주고등법원 2017.08.10 2017노175

통화위조등

Text

Defendant

All appeals filed by A, C and Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Defendant A, C, and Prosecutor’s argument that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable as the sentence is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentence against the Defendants is too unfeasible and unfair.

The crime of this case committed an act that disturbs the economic order by forging a large number of 5,00 won notes and by using some of them. The nature of the crime is not less than that of the crime. Defendant A was sentenced to criminal punishment due to fraud, etc., and the execution of the punishment was not completed. Defendant C committed a fraud by deceiving a large number of victims under the pretext of sale of game items, etc., thereby deceiving property or obtaining pecuniary gains; Defendant C is a repeated crime; Defendant C is a repeated crime; Defendant C was a repeated crime; Defendant C sustained a victim who is a female victim from the vehicle to the vehicle, and caused the injury of the right slot pulverization that requires eight weeks of medical treatment, and the degree of damage is very heavy, and no damage is recovered.

However, the defendants make a confession and reflect on all crimes, and the amount of forged currency actually exercised is limited to KRW 1.95,00,000, and in the case of some other parties to the exercise of fake currency, Defendant C and D, which reached an agreement with this court in the case of Defendant C and D, etc., are favorable to the defendants.

In full view of the aforementioned favorable or unfavorable circumstances, as well as the Defendants’ age, health status, family relation, sex, sex, environment, criminal record, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and all the sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records and pleadings, it is not deemed unfair to the extent that the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendants is too heavy or uneasible.

All Defendant A, C, and Prosecutor’s arguments that the sentencing of the lower court is unfair are rejected.

2. Conclusion, Defendant A, C and.