beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A, C and Prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against Defendant A (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant C1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles were registered as the representative director of Company I (hereinafter “I”), which was established by Defendant C (hereinafter “I”), but it was merely lent the name, and did not conspired to commit the instant crime with A.
The Defendant admitted the facts charged in the instant case at the lower court, but this is merely limited to the Defendant’s failure to know the legal principles on public offering. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine.
2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
(c)
The instant crime was committed by the prosecutor (misunderstanding the facts against Defendant B) as the Defendant and A were ordered to purchase “M” from the Ministry of National Defense, H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”), and as such, the victim Co., Ltd. belonged to the Market Korea (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”). The victim Co., Ltd. used the method of deceiving the Defendant and A as if the Defendant would pay the purchase commission to M Co., Ltd. in advance. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.).
In the form of such crime, it is essential for the defendant to intervene in the goods supplier, and at the time, the defendant took the leading role in the crime, such as interfering with N, which is the goods supplier. At the time, A means that there is a possibility that the defendant would receive M purchase business from the Ministry of National Defense, and the defendant also means that the N-related persons would definitely receive M purchase business. The victim company confirmed such fact and paid the price for the goods, and A consistently committed the crime of this case in collusion with the defendant at the investigative agency.
Jink, the victim company S also.