beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.
Defendant
C A person shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and six months.
Defendant
A. A.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A, B, and C’s each sentence sentenced to the above Defendants (three years of imprisonment; two years and six months of imprisonment; two years and six months of imprisonment; two years of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.
B. Each sentence sentenced by the prosecutor by the court below against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The crime of this case committed by Defendants A, B, and D was committed by the Defendants in collusion with the socially disadvantaged persons in a systematic and planned manner, thereby thefting considerable money from them. The Defendants’ nature of the crime is considerably poor in light of the method of the crime, the subject of damage, the scale of damage, etc.
In addition, even though there are many criminal records of the same kind of crime against the Defendants (4 times related to the theft of Defendant A, 10 times related to the theft of Defendant B, and 5 times related to the violation of the Road Traffic Act), the Defendants committed the crime of this case again, and in particular, Defendant A committed the crime of this case during the repeated crime period, the victims have not been fully recovered from the damage. Meanwhile, the victims do not want the punishment of the Defendants under an agreement with Ma and U.S. as some victims, and the Defendants do not want the punishment of the said victims, and the Defendants did not commit the crime again, and the number or degree of the Defendants’ participation in the crime seems to be relatively insignificant compared to other accomplices. In full view of all other factors, the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be appropriate, and it does not seem to be unfair because it is too harsh or unreasonable.
B. The crime of this case committed by Defendant C by taking part in the role with other accomplices and thefting money from the elderly, and thus, the victims' damage should be strictly punished. The victims' full recovery has not been made, and Defendant C again committed the crime of this case, despite the fact that there had been three same criminal records, even if there had been three same criminal records.