beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a fine of KRW 3,00,00) of the lower court is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court on the sole ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) recognizing and reflecting the Defendant’s mistake; (b) having no criminal record for the same type of crime; (c) having no penalty record exceeding fines; and (d) having experienced economic difficulties.
On the other hand, the crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by lending the means of access, such as the instant crime, is likely to be abused as a means of other crimes, and there is a need to impose severe punishment. In fact, the means of access leased by the Defendant is used as a means of the so-called “singing” crime, and the nature of the crime is not easy in light of the motive of the crime, etc.
Therefore, the court below determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of the defendant, and there is no circumstance that can be newly considered in the trial.
In addition, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances, such as the motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed to be so excessive as to go beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.