beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.09 2018노4636

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court rendered a decision to dismiss an application for compensation filed by the applicant for compensation at the lower court.

An applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against a judgment dismissing an application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Therefore, the foregoing dismissed part shall be excluded from the scope of the adjudication per party.

2. Reasons for appeal;

A. In the case of each of the crimes in this case, the Defendant did not deception the victims at the time when he borrowed each of the money as stated in the judgment below from the victims and did not deceiving them.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant on a different premise is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Determination on the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The relevant legal doctrine is established by deceiving others to put them into mistake and inducing a dispositive act, thereby obtaining property or pecuniary benefits, and there is a relation between deception, mistake, and property disposal act.

On the other hand, whether a certain act constitutes a deception that causes mistake to another person, and whether such deception and property disposal act are related to the other party should be determined generally and objectively by taking into account the transactional situation, the other party’s knowledge, character, experience, occupation, and other specific circumstances at the time of the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Do1872, Mar. 8, 198; 2013Do969, Feb. 27, 2014). Moreover, insofar as the defendant does not confession, the criminal intent of deception, which is a constituent element of fraud, should be determined by taking into account such objective circumstances as the defendant’s financial history before and after the crime, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing the transaction, etc., and the money borrowed from another person in borrowing money.