beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Of the charges of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the fraud committed on December 27, 2006 among the charges of this case is related to the fraud committed on December 27, 2006 as stated in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below, and in the case of a blanket crime, the statute of limitations shall be calculated from the end of the last crime. Thus, if the statute of limitations is calculated from the day of the last fraud committed on March 2, 2007, which was the last fraud committed on December 27, 2006, the statute of limitations has not expired.
Nevertheless, the court below rendered a judgment of acquittal on December 27, 2006 on the ground that the fraudulent act committed on December 27, 2006 expired, and thus, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.
B. The sentence of six months of imprisonment imposed by the lower court on the Defendant and the sentence of two years of suspended execution is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. On December 27, 2006, the summary of the facts charged as to the fraudulent act committed by the Defendant on or before December 27, 2006, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D, stating that “The Defendant would pay money rapidly. It was used for three to four days, and the Defendant would pay money immediately after obtaining a loan from the bank.” However, not only was it unclear whether the Defendant’s punishment can be obtained a bank loan, but also the Defendant did not have any property as a bad credit holder. However, the Defendant did not have any property every month at KRW 3,00,000 through KRW 60,000,000, and at KRW 3,000 through KRW 4,00,000, and there was no intention or ability to pay money even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim. The Defendant by deceiving the victim, i.e., the part on which the Defendant’s punishment was made by the Defendant, i.e., the Defendant’s fraud from the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant’s 20.