beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (Defendant AB: imprisonment of 10 months, additional collection charges of 1,252,50 won, Defendant A: imprisonment of 1 year, additional collection charges of 1,252,50 won, and imprisonment of 2 months) is too unreasonable.
B. Each of the above punishments against the Defendants by the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. On October 28, 2016, Defendant A was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment with labor due to sexual trafficking crimes, etc. at the Busan District Court on October 28, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 5, 2016.
Although this court decided to concurrently examine the appeal cases of the first and second original judgments against Defendant A, each of the above crimes of the second original judgment and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are concurrent crimes with the above crimes of which judgment becomes final and conclusive, and thus, a separate sentence should be imposed on each crime of the first and second original judgment. Thus, the judgment of the court below is not reversed ex officio on the ground that the arguments are combined.
B. Along with the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing on each of the grounds that the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing are not much likely to cause social harm, such as the following: (a) the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, as well as the Defendants recognize all the facts charged in the instant case; (b) the Defendants were bound by the instant case to reflect their mistakes in depth; (c) there were children who have to rear; (d) the Defendant A did not have any history to have been punished for committing the crime of deception; and (e) the case of quasi-Fraud has no history to have been sentenced to punishment for committing the crime of larceny; and (e) the act of arranging sexual traffic does not violate the sound sexual culture and good morals; and (e) the Defendants engaged in the business of arranging sexual traffic for a considerable period of time; and (e) during the suspension period of execution due to the same kind of crime.