logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.16 2015노2844
사기
Text

The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Defendant

A.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) There is no fact that the Defendant conspireds with the upper accused B on the charge of fraud against the F of a victim of mistake of facts.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended execution in October, and two hundred hours of probation and community service order) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the facts duly admitted and examined by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, in particular, the status and role of the Defendant A and the Defendant B, and the detailed method and process of the instant crime, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant A committed the fraud under the conspiracy with the Defendant B while recognizing the content of the instant crime.

Defendant

A's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

Doshe agreed with the victim F and recovered part of the damage by paying 8 million won to the above victim, and the above victim wanting the defendant A to take the action.

However, it is not good that the crime of this case itself is committed, and the defendant has a same criminal record including a criminal record and a single criminal record, and there is no special change in circumstances to determine the punishment of the defendants differently from the original judgment.

In addition, considering the motive, means and result of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, health status, criminal records, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

B. Defendant B’s quality of each of the instant crimes is not good, and the total amount of damage from each of the instant crimes is KRW 63,80,000,000, and most of the damage was not recovered.

However, the defendant B made confession.

arrow