beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
Summary of Reasons for appeal
A. As to the facts constituting the crime of Section 1 (a) of the judgment of the court below, the Defendant merely arranged for the purchase of D’s penphones, and did not sell D’s written phone to D.
B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 453,00) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant alleged that there was a misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles from the investigative agency to the court below. However, the Defendant asserted that this part of the facts were identical to the grounds for appeal, but the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below: ① the Defendant received KRW 2.50,00,00 from D, along with the Defendant’s request to request to rescue philopon from D; ② the Defendant claimed philopon from D, but the Defendant purchased philopon from a person in an influor through the “Uh Stockholm”; ③ the Defendant purchased philopon from a person in an influor’s body; ③ the Defendant provided Dolopon to D; and D sought philopon from a person.
In light of the fact that the defendant is thought, and (4) D does not know at all about the person who the defendant told, the defendant purchased a penphone from the person who was not the defendant through the "Uh Stockholm", and sold it to D again.
It is reasonable to see that the Defendant’s philopon price received from D is the same as the philopon price paid by the Defendant to a person without any influence, and even if the Defendant has no economic benefits from such transaction, it does not interfere with the recognition of the above fact). Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
B. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct determination on the unfair argument of sentencing, has the unique area of the first deliberation as to the determination of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first trial.