beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the lower court sentenced the Defendants to each sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for 5 months) is too unreasonable.
2. Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendants is a crime in which many people conspired to acquire the house lease loan system, which is implemented with public funds, to stabilize the residence of homeless workers, and the crime is not good.
Defendant
In the case of A, even though it is the first offender and the actual gain amount acquired by each of the crimes in this case (as a result of Defendant A’s assertion, the total amount of KRW 11 million) is not more than that of this case.
However, in full view of the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, including ① the following: (i) the fraud amount exceeds KRW 200 million; (ii) the sum of the fraud amount exceeds KRW 200 million; (iii) the failure to recover particular damage; (iv) the fact that there is no particular difference with the sentencing conditions of the lower court; (v) the equity between the accomplice and similar case and the punishment; (v) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, intelligence and environment; (v) relationship with the victim; (v) motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (v) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing against Defendant A is heavy
It does not seem that it does not appear.
Defendant
B In the case of B, 15 times from March 6, 2015 to May 9, 2016, the interest at an amount of 180,000 won per month shall be paid, and even considering the fact that the court below made efforts to recover damage, such as repayment of the amount of 6 million won at the court below, ① the degree of participation by a false tenant in the crime of organized defraudation as above is not easy, ② the amount of fraud is not specified as KRW 60,00,000, and even according to Defendant B’s assertion, even if the amount of fraud is not specified as KRW 60,000,000, the amount equivalent to KRW 1/3 of the above amount is distributed, ③ there is no additional damage other than the above KRW 6,000,000, and repayment of the above KRW 6 million has already been reflected in the sentencing of the court below, ④ the court below's judgment.