beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for six months.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. In light of the overall circumstances, including the fact that the Defendants are against the principle of unfair sentencing, the sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months) imposed by the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of this case is that Defendant A’s representative director, Defendant B, as a managing director of D Co., Ltd., obtained a loan under the name of the seller of the apartment unsold in lots, and Defendant B, as a managing director of D Co., Ltd., did not intend or have ability to repay the loan even if they were to obtain a loan, and if they were to lend the name of the seller of the apartment unsold in lots and the remaining real estate loan within one month in the Savings Bank, they would make a false statement that L Co., Ltd would be paid the loan within one month, and thereby, K would receive the remainder of real estate loan amounting to KRW 150 million by receiving an apartment sale in lots, and thereby, obtain financial benefits equivalent to the above amount. In light of the fact that K’s two floors leased the second floor and operated the golf practice range, the Defendants were less trust of K Co., Ltd. using the personal trust relationship with D Co., Ltd., and the victim L was liable for the remainder of the above real estate loan amount to KRW 800,000,00.
However, the defendants' time to commit the crime of this case and reflect it, and the defendants agreed with the victim L and K in the first instance. The victim and K did not want to be punished by the defendants, and the defendant A did not have any record of having been punished by the suspension of execution or more, except for punishment by a fine for the same kind of crime before the case, and the crime of this case is committed by the latter concurrent crimes with the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) which has already been decided.