logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.03.24 2017노397
사기등
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law taking the trial-oriented principle and direct principle, where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As to each of the unfair sentencing arguments by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the Defendant and the prosecutor are considered as follows: (a) the Defendant recognized the facts charged in the instant case; (b) the car was returned to the victimized company of the instant fraud; (c) the degree of the Defendant’s participation in the instant fraud aiding and abetting crime is more favorable to the victims; and (d) the crime of arranging distribution of the approaching media is likely to harm the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions; and (e) the crime of aiding and abetting the distribution of the access media was abused to another crime, such as telephone financing fraud (hereinafter referred to as “phishing”), thereby helping the Defendant to recover the damage to the Defendant’s account and defense counsel in the instant case.

However, according to the Supreme Court Decision 2016No. 1739, 2874 (Joint) Decided October 27, 2016, which was submitted by the defense counsel, and the judgment of the court below, the Busan District Court Branch Decision 2015 J. 177, 2016 J. 177, 2016 J. 99, 228 (Joint) and 228 (Joint) case and the Busan District Court Branch Branch Decision 694 Decided April 14, 2016, the crime of fraud against T, W, and Z is committed against the victim of the crime of aiding and abetting the fraud in this case.

arrow