(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.09.26 2017노2648 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2017.09.26 2017노2648

범죄단체가입등

Text

The judgment below

Of them, the guilty part against Defendant A (excluding the part of additional collection) shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment against Defendant A, C, and D is too unreasonable.

B. As to the part of the judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant A, the court below erred in the misapprehension of the facts, although it could be recognized that the defendant participated in each of the crimes of this case in relation to the period of the defendant's re-entry into the Thailand and staying there.

2) Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We examine the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of the facts related to the non-guilty portion of the defendant A, and there is no evidence to acknowledge this part of the facts charged except for the circumstance that the defendant had stayed in Thailand during the pertinent period of time as the court below properly explained, and when one of the contestors has left from the contest relationship before the others arrive at the conduct of the contest, the other contesters' actions are not jointly liable for the subsequent actions. Thus, even according to the facts of the crime in the decision of the court below, the defendant, as telephone counselor of this case, did not remove the influence on the execution of the crime, as long as he was merely a terminal of the horse group of the game group of Bos-Sing, and as long as he did not remove the influence on the execution

Considering the reasonable view, it is reasonable that the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there is no proof of the charge, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake is rejected.

3. Each of the crimes of this case against Defendant A committed the so-called phishing fraud by joining the so-called phishing criminal organization and participating in the so-called phishing criminal organization. The period or degree of participation by the Defendant who participated in the above crimes, and the above forms of crimes are social.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2016.07.21 2016노482

-광주지방법원 2017.09.13 2017노1575

-인천지방법원 2018.06.14 2017노3334

-청주지방법원 2021.02.17 2020노1507

-수원지방법원 2017.10.20 2017노5779