beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for four years and for two years and six months, respectively.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below that found Defendant A guilty of the whole facts charged in the case of mistake of facts (the defendants) 1) Defendant A victim I and J, and the part concerning the K stores and the part concerning the building V, although G and Co-Defendant B led not to participate in the above crime, there was an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The fraud case against Defendant B victim A and B was acquired by the apartment owned by the victims solely by Co-Defendant A, and the Defendant did not have any responsibility for such fraud, and the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty in collusion with the victims, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentencing of the lower court (three years of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A and two years of imprisonment for Defendant B) is too unreasonable (the Defendants) or too low (the Prosecutor).
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant A asserted that: (a) Defendant A was an accomplice in the lower court; (b) Defendant A led the victim I and J to commit a crime; and (c) himself was only passively involved in the crime; (d) Defendant A asserted that he did not participate in the case of the instant facts charged at all regarding K stores and V building-related frauds. Therefore, the first instance court and the first instance court have duly adopted and investigated the evidence; (c) in particular, the evidence duly adopted and examined the witness I’s trial statement; and (d) the protocol of examination of the suspect as to B prepared by the public prosecutor (third and investigation records) the victim I and the J were introduced from Defendant B and B; (d) Defendant A introduced K stores and V buildings to the victims; and (e) visited and opened the said real estate; and (e) Defendant A attempted to conclude a contract for exchange because only the price between them was the same.