beta
Text
The judgment below
Part on Defendant B (excluding the part on the compensation order of E) shall be reversed.
Defendant
B Imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
Reasons
1. The scope and ex officio determination of this Court
A. The part of the court below's rejection of the application for compensation filed by the applicant D and C (Defendant B) and the application for compensation filed by the applicant C for compensation filed by the applicant C in accordance with Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.
B. In relation to the application for compensation filed by C (Defendant A) and E, the part which the court below cited the applicant C’s application for compensation to Defendant A and the application for compensation to the Defendants of the applicant E is affirmed as it was judged together with the judgment of conviction by the Defendants filed an appeal pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc., but the appeal filed by the Defendants as to the part of the order for compensation was not indicated in the petition of appeal and the reasons for appeal submitted by the Defendants, and even ex officio, it cannot
(c)
In relation to F’s application for compensation, the part which cited F’s application for compensation against Defendant F’s Defendant B was tried with conviction by filing an appeal by Defendant B pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.
According to the records, Defendant B is recognized as having paid damages to the applicant F of the original judgment when it came to the trial.
Therefore, since the existence or scope of Defendant B’s compensation liability to Defendant B’s applicant F for compensation is unclear, and it is unreasonable to issue an order for compensation, this part of the order for compensation in the original judgment became no longer available (Article 32(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings). 2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (defendants A: one year of imprisonment, and one year and six months of imprisonment) which the lower court sentenced to the Defendants is unreasonable.
3. In comparison with the first instance court’s judgment on Defendant A, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the first instance sentencing is the sentencing.