beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In full view of the following facts: (a) it is difficult to understand that the Defendant, who operates a mistake of fact-finding mobile phone agency, entered into an agreement to regard his/her damage in the course of soliciting new subscribers to the mobile phone; (b) there is a circumstance that the Defendant is suspected of causing debts in mind with the application for exemption from personal bankruptcy; and (c) the facts charged that the Defendant acquired money from B from February 16, 2017 to March 16, 2017 under the name of solicitation commission from February 16, 2017, the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that he/she acquired a heavy cell phone
Nevertheless, the lower court found the facts erroneous and found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the charges.
B. The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for four months and one year of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. On January 9, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement of the facts charged in this part of the indictment that “When returning an existing mobile phone and opening a new mobile phone, he/she will pay KRW 1,542,613 out of the amount to be borne through penalty and new subscription to the existing mobile phone sales store” at the aforementioned mobile phone sales store.
However, since the defendant had no particular property at the time and the recruitment fees that can be acquired through the normal opening of the mobile phone have been excessive to 300,000 won, the victim did not have the intention or ability to pay the above KRW 1,542,613 even if the victim returned the existing mobile phone and opened the mobile phone anew.
Ultimately, the Defendant, as seen above, deceiving the victim, and thereafter, received from the victim one cell phone with a significant of 200,000 won at the market price on the same day, from that time, from March 10, 2017 to that of March 10, 2017, is in total as shown in the attached list 1 of the lower judgment.