beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal, the respective sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (the Defendant A: imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months, 3,000,000 won, Defendant B’s imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. Recognizing that Defendant A recognized all of the instant crimes, the circumstances favorable to Defendant A, such as the fact that Defendant A was in depth divided, and that Defendant B, an accomplice, agreed with some victims, are recognized.
However, the crime of this case committed by Defendant A, in collaboration with Defendant B, stolen computer parts, etc. by intrusion on several buildings, etc. on several occasions. Defendant A, by deceiving victimO, obtained 3,000,000 won as solicitation items for amnesty duties, by neglecting vehicles, and thus violating the Automobile Management Act, there is a need to strictly punish Defendant A in light of the fact that multiple crimes have been committed systematically and repeatedly. Defendant A has been punished three times for the same crime (one time, one suspension of execution, one time, and one time). In particular, Defendant A has been sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor on December 3, 2008 and has been executed on October 22, 2009, and the execution thereof has been completed, and thus, Defendant A has repeatedly committed some of the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime, and there is no reason to recognize the unfair sentencing of Defendant A’s punishment as being unfair after comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: Defendant A’s age, character and behavior, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the records of this case.
B. It is recognized that Defendant B recognized all of the crimes of this case, and was in depth divided, Defendant B agreed with some victims, and the most favorable circumstance is that Defendant B should support his family.
However, the crime of this case is committed by Defendant B in collaboration with Defendant A on several occasions.