logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.03.26 2015노235
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflected his mistake, and that the crime of this case is concurrent crimes between fraud and the crime of this case in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the sentence should be imposed in consideration of equity and equity.

However, the crime of this case is a case in which the defendant deceivings the victim, thereby deceiving the victim with cash worth of KRW 1.5 million and KRW 2.7 million. The defendant has already been punished several times due to fraud, etc., and the defendant has not submitted data on the recovery of damage to the victim. Considering the fact that there is no special circumstance or circumstance that can be newly considered in sentencing after the decision of the court below, there is no change in the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and method of the crime, and various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as shown in the arguments and records of this case, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is excessively unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per

[However, in the application of the law of the court below, the term "the pertinent provision of the Act on 1. Criminal Facts" is "the pertinent provision of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime of 1.0," and "Articles 347 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" are clearly erroneous statements in "Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and each decision of imprisonment", and thus, it is clearly erroneous statements in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.

arrow