(영문) 제주지방법원 2021.03.25 2020노1046 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 제주지방법원 2021.03.25 2020노1046

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court dismissed each of the applicants B and D’s application for compensation.

Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings provides that an applicant for compensation may not file an objection against the judgment dismissing an application for compensation. Therefore, the part dismissing an application for compensation among the judgment of the court below is immediately determined and excluded from the scope of adjudication of the court

The court below accepted the applicant E and C’s application for compensation; the defendant, by filing an appeal against the judgment of the court below, deemed that he appealed to the part of the compensation order pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings by filing an appeal against the judgment of the court below; however, the defendant did not assert the grounds for appeal regarding the part citing the compensation order in the judgment of the court below; even if examining ex officio, the grounds for cancelling or amending the part

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The fact that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and against whom the Defendant was committed, and that the Defendant has yet to age is favorable to the Defendant.

However, each of the crimes of this case committed by the 19 victims by deceiving 5,793,00 won from the 19 victims, which has a lot of frequency of crime, victims who have not recovered from any damage, and the defendant again committed each of the crimes of this case only for three months even though he was issued a summary order of a fine of KRW 2 million on March 26, 2020 due to the same crime, and the defendant was under the protection observation period.

The age, sex, and environment of the defendant.

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2021.03.04 2020노1760

-서울북부지방법원 2020.09.01 2020노900

-의정부지방법원 2019.11.22 2019노1774

-대구지방법원 2021.04.07 2021노440

-서울동부지방법원 2021.03.12 2020노1431