beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, did not err by deceiving the victim E by deceiving the victim, as in conspiracy with A, as in the criminal facts of the 2015 senior 5123 case (hereinafter “the part of denying 1”) as in the judgment of the court below, and by deceiving the victim N, as in the criminal facts of the 2015 senior 8676 case (hereinafter “the part of denying 2”) as in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “the part of denying 1”), and by deceiving the victim N, thereby deceiving the victim N of KRW 1,443,222 won (hereinafter “the goods of this case”). However, the judgment of the court below convicting all of the parts of the 1,200 won and the part of the 1,4222 won as in the judgment of the court below was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts
A. In the relation of co-offenders who are jointly engaged in a crime by more than two relevant legal principles, the conspiracy does not require any legal penalty, but is only a combination of two or more persons to jointly process a crime and realize the crime, and there was no overall conspiracy.
Even if there are two or more persons, a public contest relationship is established if a group of doctors is formed in a successive or secret manner, and so long as such a public contest is conducted, even those who do not directly participate in the conduct, are held liable as a joint principal offender for the conduct of another public contest, and such public contest can be recognized by the circumstantial facts and empirical rules even if there is no direct evidence (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do482, Apr. 27, 2004, etc.). In addition, the joint principal offender under Article 30 of the Criminal Act is established by satisfying the subjective and objective requirements of the crime committed through functional control based on the intention of joint process and its common intent. As such, part of the elements of the public contest are directly required.