logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.12.09 2016노4160
무고
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Where several persons are dismissed as a complaint, they are intended to be free from office.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because each sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The following facts are acknowledged: (a) the Defendants made confessions of all the instant crimes and reflects their mistakes in depth; (b) the investigation agency conducted an investigation to cancel the accusation against E and F; (c) Defendant A’s primary crime with no record of criminal punishment; and (d) Defendant B’s crime with no record of criminal punishment, except for the two times of fines and one time of suspended indictment; and (c) Defendant B has no record of other crimes.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendants in collusion with E and F after receiving the loan certificate stating the contents of the loan from E and F for the purpose of having the Defendants punished, and the Defendants’ personal information was stated in the borrower column and the Defendants’ seal was affixed and submitted in the name of the Defendants as if there were no facts as above. In light of the method and contents of the crime, the crime was considerably poor in the nature of the crime. The crime of false accusation is a crime that interferes with the state’s criminal justice function and is at risk of being subject to unfair criminal punishment, and is highly likely to be subject to criticism. It appears that the agreement with E and F is not proper until now, and there were no other special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the sentence of the judgment below, and all of the sentencing conditions of this case and the sentencing guidelines of each of the Defendants were applied to each of the above offenses, but the sentencing guidelines of this case, including the following facts, are not applied to each of the above offenses, in principle, to the Defendants.

arrow