beta
Text
The part on Defendant AY in the second judgment shall be reversed.
Defendant
AY shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
(b).
Reasons
1. In light of the summary of the grounds of appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the lower court’s respective sentences against the Defendants (in the case of Defendant T: 10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 3 years of probation, 80 hours of community service order, 80 hours of Defendant AY: 6 months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Defendant TY’s solicitation that reported the instant crime to an investigative agency, provided many materials to Defendant AY to inform, completed the study as a young-age undergraduate, and that there was no record of criminal punishment prior to the instant crime is favorable to Defendant T.
However, Defendant T in collusion with Party A, by aiding and abetting the morale of the work loan by aiding and abetting the fraud of Party A by means of acquiring KRW 9 million in total from three financial institutions through the work loan, recruiting those who intend to post and borrow Internet letters, and sending facsimile of necessary documents, etc., Defendant T is not likely to commit the crime. In collusion with Party A to whom the loan was granted, it is deemed that the amount was paid a brokerage commission equivalent to KRW 24.4 million in total on two occasions from the other party to the loan, and the amount was not written. In addition, considering the various factors stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are conditions for sentencing, such as Defendant T’s age, character and conduct, and environment, as seen earlier, even if considering the favorable circumstances as seen earlier, it cannot be said that the sentence against Defendant T is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant AY, although Defendant AY had not served in BX, applied for a loan to the lending company with the knowledge that the relevant documents were forged, and he/she made a false statement as if he/she were in office in BX. The fact that the crime is not good, and that the total amount of fraud is 44 million won, which is disadvantageous to Defendant AY.
However, Defendant AY reflects his own crime and repents it, and commits the crime of this case.