beta
Text
The judgment below
Among them, the guilty part against Defendant A and the part against Defendant B and C shall be reversed.
Defendant
A.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Of the guilty portion of the lower judgment, the Defendants (1) committed a telecommunications financing fraud organization to which the Defendants belong (hereinafter “H organization”) and the method or form of deception, such as the name of the organization referred to as the name of the organization, the sharing of roles at the time of misrepresentation, the amount of deception, and the amount of deception, in the case of the remaining crimes except for the re-crimes 8, 14, 16, 20, 22, and 26 of the attached list of crimes (hereinafter “the crime of this part”) among the guilty portion of the lower judgment.
In light of this, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be readily concluded that this part of the crime was committed by the H organization to which the Defendants belong. However, the court below erred in finding the Defendants guilty of this part of the crime by misunderstanding the facts contrary to the rules of evidence, thereby violating the rules of evidence.
(2) The punishment (the Defendants) that the court below sentenced against the Defendants is too unreasonable. The punishment (the 6 years of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A, the 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant B, and the 2 years and 6 months of imprisonment for Defendant C) is too unreasonable.
나. 검사 (1) 사실 오인( 피고인 A) 검사 제출 증거들에 의하면, 원심이 무죄로 판단한 범죄 일람표 순번 42, 44, 45, 49∽55 기 재 범행 또한 H 조직에 의하여 저질러 졌고 또 피고인 A이 이에 공모가 담하였음이 분명함에도, 원심은 사실을 오인하여 피고인 A에 대한 이 부분 공소사실을 무죄로 판단하는 잘못을 범하였다.
(2) The sentence that the court below sentenced against the Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. In light of the following circumstances, the evidence revealed through the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant A and B’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, this part of the crime was committed by H organization, and the Defendants’ solicitation was sufficiently recognized.
Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants cannot be accepted.
(i).