beta
Text
Defendant
A The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and ten months.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The following sentence of the lower court against the Defendants by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.
Defendant
A: Imprisonment of two months: Defendant C: Imprisonment of one year and four months; Defendant D: Imprisonment of one year and ten months;
B. Defendant A (1) In fact-finding, Defendant A was involved in the fourth crime at the time of original adjudication as a so-called cash withdrawal measure.
(2) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A is too unreasonable during the sentencing.
C. Defendant C (1) In the event of an arrest on August 22, 2014, there was no fact that Defendant C was involved in the crime that was subsequently committed, namely, the crime that exceeded KRW 17 million among the six crimes at the time of original adjudication, and the crime that was committed under Articles 7 and 8 at the time of original adjudication.
(2) A separate judgment (two years of imprisonment) against Defendant C has become final and conclusive after the pronouncement of the lower judgment on the grounds of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. The final and conclusive judgment and each of the instant crimes constitute concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.
(3) The lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable in the course of sentencing.
2. Determination
(a) Part on Defendant A: (1) Ex officio judgment on both appeals is made; and the stolen goods seized and the reason for return to the victim is apparent shall be returned to the victim by judgment pursuant to Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
However, the lower court omitted the judgment that returned to AK, AL, AJ, BD, and AE, among the cards obtained by Defendant A and B through the third offense, which was confiscated by Defendant A (Seoul Northern District Prosecutors' Office 2014 pressure No. 2198) from the victim AK, AL, AJ, BD, and AE.
From this point, the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A cannot be maintained any more.
(2) Although the judgment of the court below on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A had a ground for reversal ex officio, the argument of mistake of facts by Defendant A still has a meaning, and this is examined.
Defendant
A also brought an action identical to the purport of the appeal, and the court below explained the reasons for the judgment, and argued by the defendant.