beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the penalty of KRW 1 year and 2 months, 6,60,000) is too unreasonable.
B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (misunderstanding the facts about the non-guilty part), the court below found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged of this case, but found the Defendant not guilty of some of the crimes (the purchase and medication of each philopon and medication in the attached crime table 2.3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 19). The judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts of innocence, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Judgment on the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of facts (as to the non-indicted part of the crime)
A. The summary of the facts charged was around October 6, 2016: (a) the Defendant remitted KRW 100,000 to the Korean bank account (E) of D; (b) purchased approximately KRW 0.1g from D in the front of the residence of D located in the Dong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City after approximately 2-3 hours; and (c) purchased approximately KRW 0.05g (one-time medication) from among the Defendant’s Belgium car parked in the above place near the above place in the Defendant’s Belgium car, as above, put about approximately KRW 0.05g (one-time injection) from among the Belgium car purchased, into one-time car fraud, dilution with water and injected it into one-time car, and then administered at the dilution from around the above day to January 31, 2017; and (d) administered at the 3,4,6,8,101,111,131,17,181,17 and 10.
B. 1) In full view of the following circumstances admitted by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court proven that the remittance of each money recorded in this part of the facts charged was for the purchase of philophones to the extent beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is difficult to see
Based on the judgment that there was no proof of the crime, the defendant was acquitted by the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
(1) Defendants shall be prosecutors.