beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the overall sentencing conditions of Defendant A, the sentence of the lower court (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. In light of the overall sentencing conditions of Defendant B, the sentence of the lower court (three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. Defendant A recognized that all of the instant crimes were committed, and the depth is divided, and the amount of damage is relatively small to KRW 3,280,000 in total, and the commission of tools was recovered out of the damaged goods, and the instant crime was committed in a concurrent relationship with the special larceny, etc. finalized on September 14, 2013 by the judgment, which became final and conclusive on September 14, 2013 under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment may be mitigated or exempted in consideration of equity and equity.
However, the crime of this case committed by Defendant A, along with Defendant B, was committed by intrusion upon the victim’s house four times as well as Defendant B, and theft of money and valuables. The nature and circumstances of the crime are not good, Defendant A had been punished three times for the same crime (one time and two times for suspension of execution). In particular, on May 12, 2009, the former District Court sentenced Defendant A to imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny, etc. at the former District Court for two years on Jan. 4, 2012, and repeatedly committed the crime of this case within the repeated offense period, and Defendant A did not take any measures to recover the remainder of damage until the trial; Defendant A did not take any measures to balance the sentencing with Defendant B, other age, character and behavior, environment of Defendant A, the background, means and result of the crime of this case, and the record before and after the crime of this case; thus, Defendant A’s punishment of this case is unreasonable. In full view of the aforementioned circumstances, the argument of the lower court is unreasonable.
B. Defendant B recognized that all of the instant crimes were committed, and his depth is divided.