사기
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
Defendant
B.
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the Defendants did not agree to repay the balance of the installment to a third party when the victims and the victims sell dump trucks to a third party at the time of the contract of this case, and Defendant B had the intent and ability to make the installment payment at time, and thus, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendants of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. Even if it is not so, the sentence of the court below (2 years of imprisonment and 10 months of imprisonment) against the Defendants is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, E has consistently prepared a contract after the investigation agency and the trial court, to the effect that “dump trucks will naturally succeed to the installment at the time of the instant contract.” Since the Defendants purchased dump trucks at construction sites in which they could not be circumstances to succeed to the installment, and promised to pay the balance of the installment to a third party in a lump sum after the completion of construction works, the Defendants sold three dump trucks as they are, and sold to the Defendants, with the guarantor, etc. of the installment payment as they are.” However, there is no reasonable ground to suspect the specific and credibility of the statement. The Defendants prepared a letter that the balance of the installment would be paid in lump sum to the victims on January 4, 2011, and the Defendants still failed to accept the balance of the payment to the third party, although the Defendants continued to have sold the balance to the third party as the purchase price of the instant dump trucks.
Even if there is no guarantee for it, there is no guarantee.