beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year and six months, and by imprisonment for not more than one year and six months.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because all of the punishments of the first instance on the defendants (three years of imprisonment and confiscation, three years of imprisonment and two years of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.
2. On the other hand, each of the Defendants’ respective arguments on sentencing should be seen together.
The crime of this case is organized by the Defendants and acquired a large amount of loans from financial institutions. In particular, Defendant A and B are not very good to commit the crime by forging and using a false statement of transactions from entering and withdrawing financial institutions during the process. In addition, the crime of this case was committed several times over a relatively long period of time, and substantial part of the damage amount has not been recovered. In light of the above, it is inevitable to punish the Defendants.
However, the defendants made confession of all of the crimes of this case that reflects his mistake in depth, Defendant B agreed with the loan of the victim Lone Star Co., Ltd. in the first instance trial, and the appellate court deposited a total of KRW 49,100,000 for the rest victims, and Defendant B was the primary offender, and Defendant A and C did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime, etc. are considered to be considered to the defendants.
In addition, comprehensively taking into account the following factors: the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, motive or background of the commission of the crime, the means and method of the commission of the crime, the details and result of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, each punishment sentenced by the first instance court to the Defendants is too unreasonable.
Therefore, each of the defendants' arguments in sentencing are justified.
3. If so, the Defendants’ appeal is reasonable, and thus, the judgment of the first instance court is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal is again decided as follows.