beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for ten months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. The facts that the Defendant recognized the instant crime, and that the Defendant did not seem to have committed the instant crime under the accurate awareness of the substance and resistance of the instant crime, and that the amount of damage was a total of KRW 21.6 million (the commission of the instant crime with respect to KRW 8.5 million was committed against the attempted crime, and the damage was not realized), and that the Defendant did not have much profit from the instant crime, are favorable circumstances.
On the other hand, in order to eradicate the singishing crime, it is necessary to punish those who participated in the crime with strong punishment, and the defendant is in charge of the essential role in the completion of the singishing crime and the realization of profit as a monetary measure, and therefore the degree of participation seems not to be less easily. Although the defendant was aware that the means of access was transferred to the past and was subject to a fine for the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by transferring the means of electronic financial transactions and that the means of access was actually used for the singishing, the defendant was committed the crime of this case directly involved in the singishing, and the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of probation due to the crime of property damage.
There is no special relationship or change of circumstances that can be newly considered by this court, and in full view of the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.
Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.