(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.11.02 2018노1430

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.11.02 2018노1430

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below and the investigative agency seems to have recovered from the victims' damage, and the victims expressed their intention not to punish the defendants. However, the court below seems to have determined punishment in consideration of the above circumstances favorable to the defendants. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion on the following grounds: (a) the defendant committed a crime of the same kind in the past; (b) the defendant committed a crime under investigation or criminal trial; (c) there was no special circumstance or change that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the court below; and (d) there was no other special circumstance or change that the defendant's age, sex, family relation, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) all the sentencing circumstances including the defendant's age, sex, criminal relation, and circumstances after the sentence of the court below are considered to be unfair.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with the judgment of the court below (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure). However, inasmuch as the facts constituting the Defendant’s appeal No. 2018 order No. 5333 of the High Court Order No. 2018 are acknowledged to have been operating the Defendant’s main office at the time of the instant case, it is reasonable to determine W as the victim of the fraudulent act, and even if the correction does not affect the Defendant’s exercise of the Defendant’s right to defense, the lower court’s judgment shall be corrected ex officio in accordance

The judgment below

The "victim" of the 2nd sentence of the 14th sentence is the "J that is an employee".

참조조문

-형사소송규칙 제25조 제1항

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2018.04.20 2018노77

-서울북부지방법원 2018.04.20 2018노412

-서울북부지방법원 2018.04.06 2017노1560

-수원지방법원 2016.09.22 2016노4525

-인천지방법원 2018.01.24 2017노4023