사기
The judgment of the court below (excluding the part dismissing an application for compensation order) shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of one year and four months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A 1) No one had conspired with Defendant B with regard to the crime of fraud against the victim D by mistake of fact.
2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B (1) The Defendant was merely the introduction of the victim D to Defendant A, and the Defendant did not conspired to commit a crime with Defendant A and did not intend to commit fraud.
2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one month imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendants’ assertion of mistake on the facts that the lower court duly adopted and investigated, namely, ① the victim D was posted on the Internet by Defendant B on a restaurant advertisement, and contacted Defendant B, Defendant B introduced the victim to Defendant A, and accompanied Defendant B accompanied the victim to the planned site for the new construction of the scarcity in Kimhae-si, and ② Defendant B secured the victim’s right to operate the scar, which would exceed KRW 210 million.
In order to clearly bring about the operating right, it is necessary to send KRW 100,000,000 to the survey side of the case of the street, etc., which is the first 100,000 won.
In other words, even though Defendant A knew the fact that the above KRW 100 million was to be used in another place at the time of the false statement, it was false to the effect that Defendant A sent KRW 100 million to A, and ③ if Defendant B introduced a restaurant operation right in a normal manner as Defendant B’s assertion, it is common to raise an issue about the purpose of the above KRW 100 million if Defendant A knew that it was used differently as the victim’s speech. However, Defendant B, contrary to this, demanded that Defendant A send KRW 100,000,000 to Defendant A while having the victim believe that it would be used in another place, is normal.