(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.01.25 2017노2464

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.01.25 2017노2464

사기등

Text

Of the lower judgment, the crimes listed in attached Table 1, No. 2, No. 2689 of the High Court Decision 2017, which were 1,2, once again.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment imposed by the court below on the defendant (the first instance court: imprisonment of eight months, confiscation, second instance court: the punishment No. 2017, second instance court: the punishment No. 1 and two times a year again in attached Table 1 in attached Table 2017, second instance court's order of 2689, second instance court's order, and second instance court's order of 2017, second instance court's order of 2017, second instance court's order of 2879 is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for an ex officio judgment.

The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance against the defendant filed an appeal against all the above judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings against the defendant. Among the above judgment of the court below, the part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant should be sentenced to one of the crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act except for the crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the part of the judgment of the court of second instance as to the crimes under subparagraph 815 of the Highest 817 Highest 2017 Highest 2017 Highest 2017 Highest 1260 Highest 20, 2017 Highest 12 Highest 2017 Highest 20, 2017 Highest 2017 Highest 260, 2017 Highest 217 Highest 17 High 2, 2017 High 2.

3. Of the judgment below, the judgment of the court below as to the crime No. 1 and No. 2 of the attached Table 1 of the List No. 2017 Highest 2689 and the part of the attached Table No. 2879 of the 2017 Highest 2017 Highest 2879 is recognized, such as the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime and reflects the mistake, and that the defendant paid KRW 20,000 to the victim C

However, the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act is likely to cause other property crimes and requires strict punishment in light of its social harm.

In addition, the defendant has been punished as a crime of fraud of the same kind nine times.

The above circumstances and the Defendant’s age.

참조조문

-형법 제38조 제1항

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2018.01.11 2017노558

-대전지방법원 2016.05.12 2015노3225

-수원지방법원 2017.01.05 2016노7267

-인천지방법원 2021.01.15 2020노3598

-울산지방법원 2016.04.01 2016노207