beta
Text
The judgment below
Part concerning Defendant A, B, and C shall be reversed.
Defendant
A, in one and half years of imprisonment, and Defendant B.
Reasons
1. The lower court’s sentencing against the Defendants on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Considering the fact that the nature of the crime in this case is not good and that the amount of the subsidy obtained by deception is considerable, strict punishment against the Defendants is necessary.
However, the Defendants’ mistake is deeply divided, Defendant A, and C deposited some money in the lower court to recover damage caused by the instant crime, and the Defendants are expected to have recovered most of the damage caused by the instant crime by depositing an additional amount in the lower court. Defendant A did not have any other criminal record except for the first fine due to the promotion of eco-friendly farming and fishing industry and the violation of the Act on the Management and Support of Organic Food, Etc., and Defendant B and C did not have any criminal record exceeding the same criminal record or fine. The balance between punishment and the same crime and sentencing, and other conditions of sentencing as indicated in the instant argument, such as the Defendants’ age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, are considered, and thus, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendants’ above assertion is reasonable.
B. It is recognized that Defendant D’s Defendant D’s mistake was pened.
However, considering the fact that the nature of the crime of this case is not good, the amount of the subsidy granted by illegal means is considerable, the balance of the punishment with the same crime, and other conditions of the sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.
3. Accordingly, the appeal by the defendant A, B, and C is with merit, and the part of the judgment below against the defendant A, B, and C among the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided after the pleading as follows. The appeal by the defendant D's farming association corporation is with merit.