beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Reasons for appeal;
A. The Defendant did not fully recognize the fact that he was involved in the phishing crime by misapprehending the facts and the legal principles, and there was no intention to acquire by deception or conspiracy.
B. The Defendant asserts that the sentencing (a year of imprisonment, confiscation) of the lower court’s punishment (a year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too unfluent and unfair.
2. Determination
A. In the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant also asserted the same as in the first instance trial, and the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant crime by recognizing the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime in conspiracy with the Defendant with the Defendant’s nameless assistance staff, who had been aware of the fact that the Defendant’s act was at least the commission of the phishing fraud, by taking account of the circumstances acknowledged according to the evidence duly admitted and investigated.
Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and the defendant himself/herself was suspected of committing the phishing fraud from the time when he/she went to the investigative agency on May 30, 2018.
Further, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged by the Defendant, in addition to the fact that the Defendant stated that the Defendant was guilty and that the Defendant’s vehicle was parked in the nearby subway station and moved to the public transport only in accordance with the direction of the accomplice who is likely to be dismissed from committing the crime.
subsection (b) of this section.
B. According to the instant argument and records regarding the determination of the illegality of sentencing, the lower court appears to have reasonably decided by fully considering the various sentencing grounds asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, and there is no special circumstance to ex post facto change the sentencing.
3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. Thus, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.