beta
Text
Defendant
All A and prosecutor appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts (the part not guilty of the reasoning of the judgment below)
A. According to the evidence presented, the court below found the Defendants not guilty of the charges on this part of the charges that the Defendants conspired to arrange the purchase of child or juvenile sex as a business, and found the Defendants not guilty of the charges.
B. The lower court recognized the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, and based on this, proved that this part of the facts charged is beyond reasonable doubt.
It is difficult to see
The Court rendered a not-guilty verdict.
Examining the various circumstances cited by the lower court in a thorough and consistent manner with the record, there is no reasonable circumstance to deem that the lower court’s determination of evidence was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is significantly unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules.
We do not accept the Prosecutor’s assertion that the lower judgment erred by mistake in fact on the premise different from this premise.
2. Defendant A asserts that the judgment of the court below on the unfair sentencing of both Defendant A is too unreasonable because the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentence of the court below against Defendant A is too uneasible and unfair.
If there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court, and the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court on the ground that the new sentencing data was not submitted by the said court, and there is no change in
In addition, the fact that the defendant has committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that the nature of the crime is very poor in that he arranged sexual traffic against the juvenile, and that he committed the crime of this case again without being aware of it during the suspension of execution.