(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.10.17 2019노2016



The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be set forth in six months.

However, 2 years from the date of the final judgment.


1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there is a fact that the defendant borrowed 20 million won from the content that the defendant would repay the principal to the victim two months after the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, it is merely a civil obligation and obligation, and there was an intention and ability to repay to the defendant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendant alleged the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this case at the court below. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion and its decision in detail under the title "the judgment on the defendant's and his defense counsel's assertion". In comparison with the above judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendant, or in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. In light of the circumstances that the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing as to the allegation of unfair sentencing, including the punishment in fraud, suspended execution, the fact that there was a history of fine, and the fact that the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victim, etc., which is disadvantageous to the Defendant, but the Defendant deposited KRW 20 million, which is the principal, to the victim when he was in the trial, balance with the ordinary sentencing in the same or similar case, and other sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant argument, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc.,

The defendant's above assertion is with merit.

3. As the appeal by the defendant is reasonable, it is in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.