beta
Text
The judgment below
The parts against Defendant C, E, F, I, and J shall be reversed.
Defendant
C and J shall be sentenced to eight months of imprisonment.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant C (Undue Practices) made a confession of and reflect against all of the crimes; in the case of paragraph (1) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below as stated in the judgment of the court below, Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant C”) borrowed money to the victim T and failed to repay the money; in the case of paragraph (2) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below as stated in the judgment of the court below as follows: (a) the introduction of the victim T as instructed by A and B; (b) the degree of participation is not heavy; (c) efforts are made to agree with the victim T; and (d) health status is not good, the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant D1) In the case of paragraph (1) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below as indicated in the judgment of the court below, Defendant D1 was able and willing to repay KRW 5 million from the victim T by simply borrowing KRW 5 million from the victim T. In the case of paragraph (2) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below as stated in 2011 Highest 2911, the remittance of KRW 6 million out of the remitted KRW 10 million to B. Since Defendant D and Defendant C agreed to borrow from the victim, they do not have the intent to obtain fraud. In the case of paragraph (5) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below as stated in 2011 Highest 29111, the introduction of Defendant C and Defendant C to the victim, but it was true that the introduction of the victim T was made from March 30, 2010 to not participate in this part of the crime, in light of the degree of unfair sentencing and the overall circumstances of imprisonment with labor for up to 10 years and 20 years.
C. Defendant E (unfairness) made a confession of and reflect against all of the crimes; Defendant E’s fraud against Victim AF in 2010 large group 7223, which resulted in this case by deceiving AD; Defendant AF and AJ are scheduled to enter into an agreement or deposit; in the case of each fraud of No. 2011 large group 2911, Defendant E trust the horses of Defendant A known through BC and was deferred to the instant acts; Defendant A was repaid KRW 5 million to Defendant Q.