beta
Text
The judgment below
Part concerning Defendant B, C, D, and F shall be reversed.
Defendant
B, C, and D each fine of KRW 5,000,00;
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (the two-year probation period and the community service order 160 hours to Defendant A’s imprisonment and the community service order 160 hours to Defendant B, C, and D’s imprisonment and the community service order 80 hours to be suspended and the community service order 80 hours to Defendant E, and F’s imprisonment and the community service order 2 years to be suspended and the community service order 120 hours to be suspended) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In the case of Defendant A and Defendant E, the part that was denied by the lower court for the first time in the trial, and the part that was admitted by the lower court, the victim R and S were agreed at the lower court, there was no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and in the case of Defendant E, the period during which Defendant E participated in the sale of the goods of this case is short is favorable to the Defendants.
However, considering the fact that the crime of this case is organized against many unspecified people, including vulnerable groups, and the nature of the crime is not good, that there are two times the criminal records of the same kind of crime, and that there are other business periods and sales amounts, the means and result of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the age of the defendants, sexual behavior, environment, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below against the defendants is too unreasonable.
B. In light of Defendant B, C, D, F Defendant B, C, and D’s fact at the time of the trial, there was no history of punishment for the same kind of crime, Defendant F was the primary offender, and the degree of participation in the instant crime in light of the Defendants’ status and role, the degree of participation in the instant crime is relatively minor, and in light of the business period and sales, the means and consequence of the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the Defendants, sexual conduct, environment, etc., the punishment imposed by the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, Defendant A and E’s appeal is without merit, and thus, the appeal is in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.