beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The lower court dismissed the public prosecution on the grounds that the injured workers withdraw their wish to punish after instituting a prosecution on the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act among the facts charged in the instant case, and sentenced them to the charges of breach of trust.
However, since the defendant appealed only on the guilty portion on the grounds of unfair sentencing as follows, and the dismissal of the above indictment is separated and finalized, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the guilty portion of the judgment below
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (defendants) of the lower court’s penalty of KRW 10 million is too unreasonable.
3. Determination: (a) the value of the real estate subject to the instant crime exceeds KRW 100 million; (b) the Defendant transferred the ownership of the apartment to the victim on July 6, 2018, which was the delivery date of the apartment under the final modified contract; (c) on October 14, 2019, the victim planned marriage around October 2018; and (d) purchased the instant apartment by means of a new marriage house. The instant crime appears to have been committed by the victim to have failed to live a stable residential life for a considerable period after marriage; and (c) the Defendant was punished for attempted breach of trust, etc.
On the other hand, under the condition that the defendant's mistake is against the defendant, the victim is exempted from the remaining sale price of 28 million won, etc., the victim does not want punishment against the defendant under an agreement with the victim, and the defendant committed the crime in the course of providing multi-family housing as joint security to the financial company while running real estate development business, and there is some room for consideration in the process of the crime.
In full view of these circumstances and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the instant argument, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable.
4. Conclusion.