beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part concerning the crime Nos. 2 through 5 of the judgment against the defendant shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of one year and eight months.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing
A. The part of the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant's mistake, reflects the fact that the victims do not want the defendant's punishment at the investigation stage, but the defendant is recognized as not wanting the defendant's punishment. However, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration level was high at the time, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, family environment, circumstances of crime, means and consequence, and all of the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, character and behavior, family environment, circumstances of crime, means and consequence, etc. before and after the crime. In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, the court below's punishment (ten months of imprisonment) is appropriate and too unreasonable.
B. Despite the fact that the sum of the amounts obtained by the Defendant from victims exceeds KRW 6,50,00,00,00,000, the amount actually repaid by the Defendant for the recovery of damage, and the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime resulting from this type of crime, it is disadvantageous circumstances, however, the lower court determined that, in full view of all the records and arguments of this case including the Defendant’s age, character, family environment, motive, means, method and result of the crime of this case, and the circumstances before and after the crime of this case, the Defendant was in a trial, and agreed with the victim P, Q and L at the lower court, the victim I and L did not want the punishment of the above victims, and the victim I and L agreed with the victim in the trial, the victim does not want the punishment of the above victims, the equity between the crime of this case and the violation of the Road Traffic Act in the latter concurrent relation of Article 37 of the Criminal Act should be considered.
2. Thus, the defendant's appeal against the first crime as stated in the judgment of the court below is without merit.