beta
Text
Defendant
All A and prosecutor appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. A prosecutor (i.e., the lower court’s judgment on the articles confiscated by the Defendants, but the lower court did not render a sentence of confiscation as to the articles seized (Evidence 1, 2, and 1-4, which were seized by No. 2014 and No. 1630 of the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office 2013No. 1619) that were used by the Defendants for the instant crime. As such, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on confiscation under Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act or omitting the judgment on confiscation.
B. The sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the defendant A is sentenced to one year of imprisonment, the defendant B is sentenced to eight months of imprisonment, the suspension of execution of two years of imprisonment, the community service work 120 hours) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. (i) As the confiscation under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act is discretionary, the issue of whether to confiscate even an article that meets the requirements for the confiscation is left at the discretion of the court.
(2) In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the court below’s failure to render a sentence of forfeiture on the seized articles violates the principle of proportionality, in light of the following: (a) the seized articles are ordinarily used by the Defendants; and (b) the possibility of the same crime appears to be low; and (c) the court below’s failure to render a sentence of forfeiture on the seized articles contravenes the principle of proportionality.
Secondly, the prosecutor's above misapprehension of the legal principles or omission of judgment is without merit.
B. Determination of the allegation of unfair sentencing by Defendant A and the prosecutor is subject to larceny and stolen crimes because of high realization, and the crime related to mobile phones is likely to leak personal information contained in the mobile phone or use it as a large phone and cause other crimes, and there is a need for strict punishment due to poor nature of the crime, and Defendant A’s market price 2.