logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.02.06 2013노2083
컴퓨터등사용사기등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant, as agreed damages, 26,912,106 won to C, who is an applicant for compensation.

Reasons

Defendant

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel is that the punishment imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Therefore, in full view of all the circumstances, including the following: (a) the Defendant’s birth and her spouse’s trust; (b) obtained by deception and embezzled the amount equivalent to KRW 65 million in total; (c) the Defendant changed to the prior records to conceal a crime; (d) the victims did not recover from damage; and (e) the lower court did not have any special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be considered in the sentencing newly after the sentence of the lower judgment was rendered; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) other various circumstances that form the conditions for the argument and the sentencing indicated in the records of the instant case, including the circumstances asserted by the Defendant and her defense counsel as grounds for appeal; (e) the Defendant is deeply divided into one’s mistake; and (e) there is no criminal power exceeding the Defendant’s fine, it is not deemed unreasonable to the extent that the sentence imposed by the lower court should be reversed.

Therefore, the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's application for compensation for damages (C: 26,912,106 won, and D: 36,376,250 won) that the defendant is liable to pay for each order for compensation filed in the court of the trial are well-grounded. Thus, the defendant's application for compensation order is reasonable, and therefore, the defendant's compensation order is ordered in accordance with Article 25 (1), (2), and Article 31 (1) and (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and a provisional execution order is declared

arrow