beta
Text
The judgment below
The part concerning fraud of 2016 High Order 5297 is reversed.
Defendant 2016 High Order 5297 decided on the judgment of Defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (a crime of fraud No. 5297, supra: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, and imprisonment with prison labor for 2016 order and 3649: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months) is too unreasonable.
B. The above punishment of the court below's order against the defendant is too unhutiled and unfair.
2. Determination
A. We examine ex officio judgment (as to the crime of fraud No. 2016, proviso 5297 of the judgment), prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.
Several crimes for which judgment has not become final and conclusive, or crimes for which judgment to be sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become concurrent crimes (Article 37 of the Criminal Act) and crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive prior to the final and conclusive judgment (Article 37 of the Criminal Act), and even if there are several crimes for which judgment to be sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or more punishment has become final and conclusive, all of the crimes for
Therefore, in this case, a sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity in cases where both the crimes for which judgment has not been rendered simultaneously with the crimes for which judgment has not been rendered under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do209, Oct. 23, 2008; 2012Do1291, Dec. 27, 2012). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant was sentenced at the Seoul Central District Court on Dec. 23, 2010 to two years of suspended sentence for 6 months of imprisonment for fraud and on April 28, 201 (hereinafter referred to as “one final judgment”), and the final judgment of Seoul Central District Court on Apr. 27, 2012 to be rendered final and conclusive on Apr. 13, 201 (hereinafter referred to as “the final judgment”) with the final and conclusive judgment rendered on Apr. 27, 2012.