beta
Text
The judgment below
Among the parts against Defendant A, the remainder excluding the compensation order and the dismissal of the application for compensation.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although there was no misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles as to habitual fraud (defendant B) and habitually committed the crime of fraud, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, and thus, there was an error of misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles.
B. In light of the legal principles as to confiscation, evidence Nos. 1 and 4 confiscated by Defendant A does not constitute a mobile phone used for committing a crime.
Nevertheless, since the court below sentenced confiscation of each of the above confiscated articles, it erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles.
(c)
Sentencing (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years and 6 months, confiscation, Defendant B: imprisonment for 2 years and 6 months, confiscation, additional collection KRW 200,00) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. A. In the first instance trial of the ex officio judgment, the prosecutor filed an application for changes in indictment with respect to Defendant A to add the same content as the previous one [the additional criminal facts] among the “a summary of criminal facts and evidence” as stated below. Since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below against Defendant A was no longer maintained.
However, despite the above reasons for reversal ex officio, Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.
B. In order to be subject to conviction under the Criminal Act as to the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles on forfeiture, it shall be an object provided or intended to be provided for the commission of a crime. Here, the offer of a criminal act refers to an act directly used for, or closely related to, the commission of a crime as the tool of a crime.
According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant A.