특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
The part concerning Defendant E in the judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
E shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months.
Defendant .
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A and D1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles did not intend to acquire investments from Defendant C, B and victims, or deceiving the victims. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles [the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)] did not have any criminal intent to acquire by deception, there was no conspiracy to acquire the investments of Defendant A, D, C and victims, or deceiving the victims. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.
C. Defendant C1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles do not have the fact that Defendant B, A, D, and victims conspired to acquire an investment money. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.
Defendant
E1) The Defendant did not receive money under the pretext of deceiving Defendant B or soliciting a case dealt with by a public official. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
E. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the part of innocence for Defendant B and E) 12,388,000 won embezzlement in Defendant B’s name, and the Defendant transferred KRW 120,000,000 to AC’s deposit account, and KRW 3880,000,000 to AD’s deposit account in the name of M for business purposes. Since this is irrelevant to M’s business and did not have been returned after the fact, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part even though it could be recognized, there was an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.
B) Defendant E (1) Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act due to the receipt of money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation and good offices (the Defendant is not guilty of the facts charged in the principal offense). The Defendant is 228,144.