beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals against the defendant A and the prosecutor B are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against Defendant A (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s sentence (7 million won in penalty) imposed on Defendant B is so unfluened that it is too unfluent.
2. Determination
A. There is no circumstance to consider Defendant A as favorable to Defendant A, such as the fact that Defendant A appears to have the attitude of reflecting the recognition of the instant crime, and that Defendant A has no record of criminal punishment heavier than suspension of qualification.
However, the crime of this case, which Defendant A lent another person's construction business license and constructed three-year multi-family housing, may cause severe harm to the society due to defective construction, and the defendant A has a record of criminal punishment of fines once for the same crime. In addition, considering the following factors: Defendant A's age, sex, environment, background of the crime of this case, circumstance of the crime before and after the crime, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case and the theory of changes, such as the circumstance before and after the crime, the sentence imposed by the court below against Defendant A is too unreasonable. Thus, the above assertion by Defendant A is without merit.
B. The instant crime committed by Defendant B with a loan of another person’s construction business license and constructed one of the multi-family housing units with the same claim for sentencing against Defendant B by the public prosecutor is disadvantageous to Defendant B, including the fact that the crime is inferior as seen earlier.
However, in light of the following factors: (a) Defendant B appears to have the attitude against the Defendant B while recognizing the instant crime; (b) Defendant B has no record of criminal punishment; and (c) the overall sentencing conditions indicated in the records and theories on changes, such as Defendant B’s age, sexual conduct, environment, circumstances before and after the instant crime; and (d) the sentence imposed by the lower court against Defendant B is too excessive.