beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
The punishment for A shall be three years.
Reasons
1. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment as to Defendant B’s unfair assertion of sentencing, and the sentencing of the original judgment is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it shall be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In the case of Defendant, there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment, since the new materials of sentencing were not submitted by this court.
In addition, considering the facts that the crime of this case was committed by forging or altering the specification and passbook of transaction and using them, and the nature of the crime is not very good, the crime of this case is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion by excessively neglecting the sentence of the court below against the defendant, even though considering all of the factors of sentencing as stated by the court below are favorable to the defendant.
Defendant’s assertion that the sentence of the court below is unreasonable is rejected.
2. According to the records of this case’s ex officio determination as to Defendant A, Defendant A may be recognized on August 31, 2016 as having been sentenced to a suspended sentence of one-year imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) in the Macheon Branch of the Gwangju District Court on August 31, 2016 and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 18, 2017.
As above, since the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive and the crime of this case are concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a sentence for the crime of this case shall be imposed by taking into account equity and the case at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the part of the judgment below against Defendant A among the judgment below is no longer maintained.
3. In conclusion, the part of the judgment below against Defendant A is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by Defendant A, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.