The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that this judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the court below sentenced the Defendants (defendant A, B: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years, and Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A and the above Defendants recognized all of the instant crimes.

After the letter of guarantee for the payment of this case was submitted, the risk of damages has not been realized significantly due to the discovery of forgery.

Since the crime of this case committed by the above Defendants is one of the concurrent crimes with the crimes for which each judgment becomes final and conclusive (defendant A: fraud, etc.; Defendant B; charge of forging private documents) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined at the same time in consideration of equity and the same.

However, while the above Defendants were to obtain a loan of KRW 7.6 billion using a payment guarantee certificate in the name of a forged bank, they additionally provided a written confirmation in the name of the head of a bank branch stating that the above payment guarantee is true in order to conceal it when it was discovered. The amount that the Defendants intended to obtain by deception reaches KRW 00 million, and the circumstances after the Defendants’ fraud and the crime are very poor.

Defendant

In the case of B, in the investigation agency, the defendant C had the defendant C to make a false statement as if he received the payment guarantee and confirmation directly from N.

Defendant

A has the record of being punished four times as a crime of fraud, and Defendant B had the record of being punished once as a crime of forgery of a private document and a crime of accompanying crime, which forged 44 times as a crime of fraud, such as a two-time payment guarantee, and a single crime of accompanying crimes, the same type has been committed.

In addition, comprehensively considering all the sentencing conditions of the above Defendants, such as character, conduct, environment, circumstances, and consequences of the crime, the lower court’s sentence against the above Defendants is appropriate and too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C is taking part in a forged crime by confirming the authenticity of the letter of guarantee for payment.