beta
Text
The judgment below
All convictions shall be reversed.
Defendant
C Imprisonment for two years, and Defendant A for eight months, respectively.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The name "defendant" is used only for the defendant who falls under each item below defendant C, and the remaining defendants are written only in their names.
1) Some of the products listed in the crime sight table (1) attached to the judgment of the court below in the misconception of facts are those directly produced by the defendant or gold farm Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "gold farm").
) It is not a product, not a stolen product, but a product other than the gold farm is likely to have been distributed among the time. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded that it is a stolen product merely on the ground that the piracy on the acquisition process of the Defendant is difficult to obtain. Even if criminal facts of the acquisition of stolen goods are acknowledged, the day on which the Defendant purchased the product from another company, not the day on which he sells the product, but the day on which the Defendant purchased the product from his name in the name of the other company, but the Defendant purchased the product more than twice from his name in the name of the other company. The Defendant purchased the product more than once from his name in the name of the other company, and even if it is difficult to believe the change, there is no proof as to whether the Defendant has acquired the product more repeatedly through several times, and thus, it is not recognized that the Defendant has habitually committed the crime of acquiring stolen stolen goods. 2) The lower court’s punishment of unfair sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unfair.
B. Defendant A appealed from the judgment of the court below regarding the guilty portion, and the prosecutor did not appeal. Thus, the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A was excluded from the judgment of the court below.
1) Some of the products listed in the annexed list of crimes (2) in the judgment of the court below in erroneous determination of facts cannot be deemed as stolen products, since they were directly manufactured by C or those manufactured by gold farm, and other gold farm products may have been acquired by C from the market. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded that they are stolen products. 2) The court below of unfair sentencing is unreasonable.