사기
The judgment below
The acquittal portion shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
1. The court below's scope of the judgment of this court is that the dismissal of prosecution against the victim C among the facts charged in the instant case was dismissed, and that the prosecutor appealed against the victim G, and that the dismissal of prosecution without the prosecutor's appeal was finalized upon the expiration of the appeal period. Thus, the judgment of the court below is to be made only with respect to the acquittal portion among the judgment below.
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts as to the acquittal portion) in light of the consistent statement by the victim G, etc. that the defendant acquired money in the name of the termination cost of provisional seizure, despite the fact-finding, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the charges, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion
3. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below
A. On July 8, 2010, the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, at E cafeteria located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Busan-gun, the Defendant did not release the victim G, who is the child of the Defendant’s model F, from provisional seizure in the name of the neglect industry corporation established in relation to the Defendant’s H land in the Gyeong-gun, Busan-gun, Busan-gun, but said that it was necessary to cover KRW 4.5 million.
However, in fact, the expenses for the cancellation of the above provisional seizure are not required as above, as well as the amount of KRW 70,000,000, which was received from C, the wife of the defendant's type F networkF, around February 4, 2008, as the expenses for the termination of provisional seizure in the name of the neglected industry corporation, I, and five parcels, which was established as the expenses for the termination of provisional seizure in the name of the
Nevertheless, the defendant made a false statement to the victim and received 4.5 million won from the victim's place to the victim as the expenses for termination of provisional seizure.
B. The lower court determined that the evidence consistent with this part of the facts charged has been made by the victim G, but the victim is false to the J of the lower court.