logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.05.29 2019노4315
전자금융거래법위반
Text

Defendant

A All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants (Defendant A: imprisonment of one year and six months, confiscation, Defendant B: 10 months of probation, two years of probation, probation, community service, confiscation) is deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has the unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, Defendant A and Defendant A recognized the partial crime of crime of Article 1-B as indicated in the judgment of the lower court on the grounds of unfair sentencing, although this does not appear to have been changed to the extent to change the sentencing of the lower court, and other circumstances in which Defendant A and Prosecutor (Defendants) asserted as the grounds of unfair sentencing are already reflected in the sentencing of the lower court. In full view of the fact that new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial and other various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendants’ age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the sentencing of the lower court on Defendant B is too heavy or uneased, and the sentencing of the lower court on Defendant B is too uneased, and it cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. As such, the appeal against the Defendants by Defendant A and the Prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow