beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (four months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and 80 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment defendant recognized the crime of this case and has no record of being punished for the same crime.
The crime of this case is one of the concurrent crimes with the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in the first head of the crime in the judgment below, etc., and the crime of this case is one of the concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and there is a need to consider equity in
However, the Defendant transferred one copy of the e-mail card to the account opened in his own name. Such crimes infringe on the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions and abuse as a means of phishing, which is a telephone financial company, need to strictly punish such crimes.
The access media transferred by the Defendant was actually used for the phishing crime, and the occurrence of the 6010,000 won damage to the phishing.
The community service order is an order to have a criminal who has been convicted of committing a normal social life instead of being detained in a prison and engage in a normal social life with no remuneration for a designated time within a certain period. It seems that there is a growing need for a criminal to reflect his/her behavior and to have an opportunity to recover the sense of social responsibility through community service.
The court below, in light of these circumstances, has determined a sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. The sentencing of the court below appears to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and circumstances alleged by the Defendant in the trial at the court below have already been sufficiently considered in determining the punishment, and there are no other new data to change the sentencing of the court below.
Therefore, the court below's sentence is sentenced.