사기미수
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant only filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of loans on a legitimate basis because he/she had lent KRW 390 million to the victim and received a promissory note; and (b) did not intend to deceive the court and acquire the amount of loans; (c) the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, contrary to what is alleged in the
2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal
A. On July 30, 2014, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming the return of a loan of KRW 390 million with the victim as the Defendant based on a promissory note issued under the name of the victim C’s wife D, which the Defendant possessed (Seoul Central District Court 2014No. 39362). However, the Defendant did not actually lend KRW 390 million to the victim. However, the said promissory note was issued in collusion with the Defendant.
Nevertheless, the defendant attempted to acquire the above money from the injured party by deceiving the court and obtaining a favorable judgment as above, but the victim actively contests the above money by responding to it, and the court did not have the intention to make the judgment against the plaintiff, but did not commit an attempted crime.
B. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court determined that the instant promissory note and instrument were prepared and issued to E in convenience by transferring the victim’s claim to E with respect to the amount of KRW 300 million to the victim’s mother-child Party E in lieu of paying off the amount of KRW 300 million to the victim’s mother-child Party E, and did not actually lend the victim the amount equivalent to KRW 390 million at its face value to the victim, and even if the Defendant was well aware of such circumstances, it was separate from the Defendant’s claim against the victim E.