사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
except that, for a period of four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The summary of grounds for appeal;
A. At the time of borrowing money from the injured party, the Defendant (the Defendant’s fraud against the victim J) raised annual income equivalent to KRW 86,360,000 at the time of borrowing money from the injured party. Since the Defendant owned apartment houses equivalent to KRW 420,000,000 and the ability to repay was sufficient, there was no intent to commit fraud.
B. The prosecutor (the crime of occupational embezzlement against the victim J) paid the insurance premium of KRW 1,300,000 per month to the Defendant in cash from January 2010 to October 2014.
In full view of the consistent statement, the defendant's assertion that the amount of insurance premium falls short of the monthly insurance premium and it is difficult to believe that the victim's insurance premium was paid at his own expense, in light of the fact that the entries of the account book prepared by the victim correspond to this, the defendant was directed to his living standard at the time, and the circumstances that he embezzled the insurance premium under the name of the victims or obtained the insurance loan without permission, the defendant's assertion that the amount of the insurance premium was less than the monthly insurance premium is less than the amount of the monthly insurance premium
2. In the lower court’s determination on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant alleged the same purport as the above grounds for appeal, and the lower court, in full view of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, had the Defendant had the intention to commit the crime of defrauding the Defendant by deceptive means at the
The defendant's argument was rejected.
In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant repaid the Defendant’s obligation to the Defendant at KRW 8,00,000,00, which was paid out of the Defendant’s monthly income, and the Defendant was obligated to pay KRW 100,000,000 as well as the remainder of the Defendant’s obligation to the Defendant’s monthly income.