beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.
Defendant
C shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of eight months.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. As to the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receipt of Crimes Nos. 40, 54, 56, and 58, among the facts charged in this case against Defendant A, the court below found Defendant A not guilty on the grounds of the judgment, and found Defendant A guilty on the charge of violating the Act on the Regulation of Other Similar Receipt of Crimes, which is a single comprehensive crime, in the judgment, and did not separately pronounced guilty on the part of the judgment. The part of the judgment of the court below on the grounds that Defendant A and the prosecutor appealed only for the guilty portion, and the part of the acquittal for which the prosecutor did not appeal is not appealed to the trial but also goes beyond the actual object of the judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004). In the judgment of the court below, Defendant A should be tried only on the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below.
2. Summary of reasons for appeal;
A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) Defendant A (as to the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receipt Act No. 39 No. 1 of the List of Crimes A), Defendant A (as to the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receipt Act No. 39 of the List of Crimes), only invested at F’s recommendation, and the lower court found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending
2) Defendant B merely worked as the president F driver and did not have been involved in the business of attracting investors and explanation of attracting investment, and the lower court found Defendant B guilty of the facts charged in the instant case even though he did not intend to commit an act of receiving similar facts. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. Improper sentencing 1) Each sentence sentenced by the lower court (2 years of suspended sentence of one year, Defendant B: fine of 10 million won, Defendant C’s suspended sentence of eight months, observation of protection, community service 80 hours) is too unreasonable.
2) The above-mentioned sentence, which the court below decided against Defendant A, is too unhued and unfair.