Facts
The Federal Court dealt with an appeal against a judgment of the High Court of the Canton of Zug, in which the appellant 1 was convicted of commercial fraud, multiple forgery of documents, and multiple obtaining of a false certification. Appellant 2 was the father of appellant 1, and appellant 3 was the legal representative of both. The High Court had sentenced appellant 1 to a custodial sentence of 3 years, while it had sentenced the co-defendant [C.] to only 18 months' imprisonment with probation. Appellant 1 complained that this different sentencing was legally unequal. The Federal Court concluded that the lower court had not sufficiently taken into account a significant factor in sentencing the co-defendant [C.] , namely the reduced guilt due to the victim's co-responsibility. Therefore, the judgment was overturned on this point and the case was remanded to the lower court for re-assessment.Considerations
The Federal Court stated that in the case of a series of committed fraud, where the perpetrator proceeds according to a uniform pattern, the objective elements of fraud, in particular the fraudulent deception, can initially be examined in a general way for all individual cases, insofar as these are actually equally situated and do not differ significantly with regard to the victim's…