사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Fact mistake: The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the fraud among the facts charged on the ground that it cannot be recognized as an illegal acquisition intent or any other criminal intent, even though the Defendant received cash 10 million won as stated in the facts charged from the damaged person by deception.
Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. Improper sentencing: The lower court’s sentence (amounting to KRW 3,000,000) is too uneasy and unreasonable.
2. Facts charged;
A. On May 28, 2014, the Defendant of a private document forgery would be “1,00,000 Won and the duration column by 05 May 28, 2016” in the column where “1,000,000,000 Won and the period column” is located using a tamp-type tamp-type 102 of the apartment pre-sale contract form in the D Authorized brokerage office located in the Gu, Ansan-si.
“The lessor stated “Seoul-do G, H, I, J, and K” in the lessor column and signed “K next to its name.”
Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged one copy of the apartment lease contract in the name of K, which is a private document on rights and obligations.
B. The Defendant exercised the said investigation document as if it were a document that was duly formed with the delegation of the lessor K to L, a lessee under the said apartment lease agreement, who was aware of the forgery at the above time and place.
(c)
The Defendant, at the above date and place, proposed a chapter 1 of the lease contract for apartments forged as above, deceiving the victim L as if he/she agreed to enter into a new lease contract by increasing the lease deposit amount of KRW 10 million.
The Defendant received 10 million won in cash from the injured party, namely, in the name of deposit money for the lease on a deposit basis.
3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
(a)the subjective element of fraud;