beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed against A and the prosecutor F by the defendant F are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment (i) imposed by the court below on the defendant A (no. 2 in the judgment below: 10 months: imprisonment; (ii) imprisonment with prison labor for any of the crimes of paragraphs 1-a, 2-b and 4 in the judgment below: one year and six months; and (iii) imprisonment with prison labor for any of the crimes of paragraphs 1-b, 3 and 7 in the judgment below; two years and six months) is too unreasonable.
(B) The defendant explicitly withdraws his assertion of mistake of facts on the second trial date of the trial.
According to the testimony, etc. of the witness of the court below, it should be viewed that there exists a causal relationship between the deception that the defendant did not notify the actual owner of the apartment and the disposal of the victim's disposal.
B) In addition, in full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant was aware of the forgery of the monthly rent contract, and thus, the defendant did not have the intent to repay and the ability to repay at the time of the crime of this case). Ultimately, although the defendant conspired with A as stated in this part of the facts charged, and could sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant deceivings the victim and acquired the loan, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, the court below erred by
2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (one hundred and twenty months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, one hundred and twenty hours of community service order, and forty hours of law-abiding driving lecture, are deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.
2. The defendant's judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the defendant A has become final and conclusive, and all of the crimes of subparagraph 2 (a) of the decision of the court below are recognized. The crime of subparagraph 2 (a) of the judgment of the court below is a concurrent crime between the crime of fraud as stated in the judgment of the court below and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the equality with the above crime should be considered at the same time as the above crime, and the damage has been recovered by the