beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.
, however, from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the lower court sentenced the Defendants to the punishment (for each of the Defendants, eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of this case is that the defendants acquired a considerable amount of proprietary benefits, such as the monthly rent, by deceiving or providing offices with a large amount of profits against the victims, and that the defendants borrowed money as if they were to repay within a prompt time, and the nature of the crime was very poor. Furthermore, even if the defendants conspired with each other on April 21, 2015 and were punished for a crime of fraud committed by means of a method similar to the crime of this case, the defendants committed the crime of this case again at the time when it has not yet been long, and even until now, the victims did not completely recover from the damage.
However, in full view of the circumstances favorable to the Defendants, including the fact that the Defendants were found to have made a mistake late later and the Defendants were divided, that there was no history of punishment exceeding a fine, that part of the amount of damage was paid to the victims before the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below, and that the victim was paid in addition to the amount of KRW 8.2 million after the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below in accordance with the contents of the agreement, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and the theory of changes, such as the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, family relationship, family environment, circumstances after the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is judged that each punishment imposed by the court below against the Defendants is unfair because it is too too unreasonable.
All of the defendants' arguments are justified.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all appeals by the defendants are well-grounded, and the judgment below is reversed, and the following is ruled through a new theory of change.
[Judgment to be used again]