logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.09 2016노4990
사기등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Regarding the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below against the Defendants, the Defendants asserted that the Defendants were too unfasible and unfair, while the prosecutor asserts that the Defendants were too unfasible and unfair, as they were too unfasible, with respect to each sentence sentenced by the court below against the Defendants (a year and eight months of imprisonment, confiscation, Defendant B’s imprisonment, and confiscation).

2. In other words, the court below's unfavorable circumstances, namely, the social hazard to the crime of telecommunications financing fraud, the defendants' participation in the crime, and the defendant's act of taking charge of the duty of withdrawal indispensable to the crime, and the extent of participation is not easy. In light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant's failure to recover damage caused by each crime of fraud, that is, the defendant's attitude to recognize his mistake and reflect in depth. The frequency and amount of the crime are small amount and the profits earned by the defendants are deemed not significant. The defendant A only has the past record of the crime subject to punishment once by fine, and the defendant B has no past record of the crime of this case, and there are other kinds of crimes committed by the defendants, including the motive, means and result, after the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime of this case, the age of the defendants, sexual behavior, environment, etc., and all other circumstances showing no changes in the conditions of sentencing compared with the sentencing of the court below, the court below's punishment against the defendants is too excessive or excessive.

3. Accordingly, the appeal by the Defendants and the public prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the Defendants and the public prosecutor is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow