beta
Text
All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.
The application for compensation of this case is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (two years of imprisonment for Defendant A: three years of imprisonment for Defendant B; one year and six months of imprisonment for Defendant C) is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by the Prosecutor by the lower court to the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. We also examine the judgment prosecutor and the Defendants’ respective arguments regarding the unfair sentencing.
The court below held that each of the crimes of this case was committed closely and systematically against many and unspecified persons, which is so-called Bosishing crime that has a large damage to many and unspecified persons for a short time, and is in a structural aspect that does not facilitate damage recovery, and that there is a need to strictly punish a person who has participated in the crime since the trust relationship with the whole society has a serious adverse effect on the whole society. Further, since the role of withdrawing cash is very important and conclusive for the completion of the whole crime, the part of the defendants' participation in the crime is not that the responsibility is not less and less than that of the defendant, and the defendants appear to have an attitude to recognize and reflect the crime, the defendants led the crime or the degree of participation is more serious than other accomplices.
In addition, the defendants did not seem to have significant profits from crimes compared to the total amount of proceeds from crimes. The defendant A tried to recover damage, such as the victim BS, CB, Q2, BY, BY, BY, Z, M, BL, BW, CT, DL, DM, CV, and CY, considering the favorable circumstances, the defendant A sentenced the above punishment.
In addition to the above circumstances, the court below took into account the following circumstances: (a) under favorable circumstances in which Defendant A submitted an additional agreement with 11 victims when Defendant A was in the trial; (b) the amount withdrawn by Defendant A and B is a large amount of KRW 100 million each; and (c) Defendant C voluntarily from the end of January 2016 at the investigative agency.