사기
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven months.
The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of legal principles): 1-1. Criminal facts as indicated in the judgment of the court below; the Defendant delivered a copy of the check to the victim C on February 2, 2014, which was first issued to the victim C, and thus, even though the scope of fraud is not established, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.
Sentencing: The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and two months) is too unreasonable.
Judgment
In the judgment of the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the defendant argued the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the court below rejected the defendant's argument and convicted the defendant of the charges by clearly explaining the defendant's argument in detail, even if the defendant issued the victim C a certificate of KRW 10 million after the crime of deception, since the amount obtained by deceit is all the amount received, not the difference between the amount paid from the damaged person's money and the amount received, even if the price was partially paid in fraud, the amount obtained by deceit is not the difference between the amount paid from the damaged person's money.
Examining the judgment of the court below and the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law as otherwise alleged by the defendant in the judgment below.
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.
The defendant did not appear from the date of the fourth trial on January 6, 2016 to the date of the trial on several occasions and did not confirm his location. Thus, the defendant is guilty of his crime through his defense counsel.