The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below rendered by the defendant (700,000 won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, following the record, the Defendant appealed on September 29, 2016 after having been sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in the Seo-gu District Court Branch Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court, but on January 13, 2017, the Defendant’s appeal was dismissed at the Daegu District Court, and the Defendant’s appeal was withdrawn, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 8, 2017.
As above, in relation to the crime of fraud for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the crime of this case, punishment shall be determined after considering equity and mitigation or exemption of punishment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act in the concurrent crimes relationship after Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained in this respect.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows after pleading.
The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment (the point of fraud and the selection of fines);
1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:
1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act reaches 13 times the criminal records, including the criminal records, which were sentenced to criminal punishment due to fraud, and the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he/she committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he/she was sentenced to one year of imprisonment due to fraud, etc. and the execution of the said sentence was completed on April 12, 2014