사기
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant only introduced F to the victim C in relation to the funeral contract for a grave and received money from the victim. Thus, the defendant did not have received money by deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the charged facts of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty based on the following facts: (a) the victim C consistently stated that the Defendant paid KRW 8 million under the name of the deposit to the Defendant by deeming that the contract for the relocation of the graves in the area of the Si/Gun/Gu (U.S.) is to disappear, and (b) the witness E prepared a cash custody certificate to the effect that the Defendant “the Defendant was paid KRW 8 million,” and the Defendant stated that the signature and interfered with the said cash custody certificate; (c) the Defendant was paid KRW 8 million from the victim under the pretext that he would conclude the contract for the use of the punishment and the removal work; and (d) the Defendant would pay KRW 12,559,612 to the victim if the contract is not concluded on November 5, 201; and (e) the Defendant’s direct use of the checks received from the victim; and (e) the Defendant’s deception by deceiving the victim.
B. On the other hand, the court below's reasoning based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the following circumstances, namely, ① the defendant marks a seal on the cash custody certificate as of September 16, 2010 (hereinafter "cash custody certificate"), despite recognizing the fact that the defendant marks it in blank. However, even on the face, the main part of the above cash custody certificate and the part on the signature and seal of the defendant are posted.