logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.09.20 2017노1239
전자금융거래법위반등
Text

Defendant

D All appeals filed by both D and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant D’s punishment (limited to 8 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence against the Defendants of the lower court (Defendant A and B: the probation period of two years, the observation of protection, the community service order of 240 hours, the community service order of 1 year and six months: the Defendant C: the imprisonment of one year and six months; the Defendant D: the imprisonment of eight months; the probation period of two years, the observation of protection, and the community service order of 160 hours in the imprisonment of eight months) on the Defendants of the lower court is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. It is favorable for Defendant D to recognize all of the crimes of this case and reflects the wrongness of the Defendant. The Defendant did not have any profit acquired by the crime of this case, the Defendant agreed with the victim, and the Defendant’s family members want to leave the Defendant’s wife against the Defendant, and the Defendant’s health condition is not good.

However, as revealed by the court below, the crime of this case is a so-called "Sishing" crime and needs to be eradicated through severe punishment, and the defendant's withdrawal measures play an essential role in the realization of the crimes of Bosing, as well as the arrest and punishment of the principal offender who led the crime in the hinterland is not easy. Thus, the degree of the defendant's participation in the crime of this case is light.

It is difficult to see that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of during the period of suspension of execution, and that the Defendant had been punished several times for the instant crime, and that the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million due to the fraud of the same species around July 2016.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, background, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., there are no special changes in circumstances that make the judgment below and the punishment different from those mentioned in the judgment below, it is not recognized that the court below’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's status.

arrow