beta
Text
The judgment below
The Supreme Court Decision 2010Ma2576, 201Ma828 (limited to fraud under paragraph (1) in the market), 866, 2694.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too heavy (eight months of imprisonment and three years of imprisonment) of the lower court;
2. According to the judgment of the court below on November 13, 2013, where the defendant committed each of the crimes except the crimes of subparagraph 1 among the judgment below on the ground of appeal in relation to each of the crimes of subparagraph 2, 2010, 2576, 2011, 828 (limited to the crime of fraud under paragraph (1) at the market), 866, 2694, 2013, and 1483 (hereinafter "the crime of subparagraph 1 among the crimes of this case"), the defendant, in the judgment of the court below, after he committed each of the crimes of subparagraph 1 among the crimes of this case (hereinafter "the crime of subparagraph 2 in this case"), he embezzled the victim's 130,000 won from the Seoul Western District Court on February 12, 209, and acquired the victim's 10,000 won from the victim on the sum of the crimes of subparagraph 2 in this case at the Seoul Western District Court.
It can be recognized that the facts established on November 21, 2013, which were sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor, have become final and conclusive. Among the instant crimes, the crime of subparagraph 2 and the said crime of fraud, which became final and conclusive, are related to the latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment shall be determined in consideration of equity with the case where a judgment has been rendered at the same time under Article 38(1)
3. Of the instant cases, the Defendant’s confessions of the instant crime against the ground for appeal against the first crime among the crimes in question, and there is no record of criminal punishment for the same crime before committing the first crime among the instant crimes, and the crime of fraud, which is the first head of the lower judgment, and the crime of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, are favorable to the Defendant.
However, among the instant cases, the first crime was committed several times against the victims who found the first crime after the Defendant made false advertisements in newspapers, etc., and the crime was serious, and the amount of defraudation is about KRW 90 million, and the victim did not reach an agreement with the victims.