logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.08.10 2016노1186 (1)
사기등
Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for nine months;

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We also examine each unfair argument of sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor.

Each of the crimes of this case is unfair in light of the method and frequency of the crime, duration, number of victims, etc., the total amount of damage exceeds KRW 35 million in the case of the crime of fraud, approximately KRW 5 million in the case of the crime of habitual assault, and KRW 5 million in the case of the crime of habitual assault, the defendant continuously committed the crime of habitual assault in this case while he was prosecuted for some of the crimes, and the defendant was punished for the crime of fraud on three occasions, and the defendant had the record of being punished for the crime of habitual assault in this case. In the case of the crime of this case, the mental delay of the gambling and thus, the victim who is vulnerable to the crime of this case is against AI and is highly likely to be subject to criticism.

On the other hand, all of the crimes of this case were led to the defendant's family members to prevent recidivism, such as the fact that the defendant made confession of each of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake in depth, that most victims including AI, including AI, agree with victim F and so on, have not been punished, that the defendant did not have any criminal record exceeding the fine, that the degree of the conflict is not severe, that the defendant's efforts to recover the damage was paid or is expected to be paid, and that the defendant's family members are leading to the prevention of recidivism, booming the defendant's wife against the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions shown in the instant records and arguments, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is justified.

arrow