사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months for each crime of fraud in the original judgment.
1. The lower court’s scope of trial is in the relation between the crime of occupational embezzlement for which a judgment became final and conclusive as to the crime of occupational embezzlement among the facts charged in the instant case and the composite crime of which this part of the facts charged is the
As a result, a final judgment was rendered on the grounds that the effect of the final judgment extends to this part of the facts charged, and the remaining facts charged were found guilty, and only the defendant filed an appeal on the grounds of mistake of facts and unreasonable sentencing.
Therefore, the part of the court below's decision of acquittal was separated and confirmed, and the above occupational embezzlement was excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Fact-finding 1) On February 20, 2014, the Defendant did not borrow KRW 10 million from the victim E on February 20, 2014, respectively. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25179, Feb. 20, 2014>
On February 26, 2013, the Defendant, through the Defendant’s wife, remitted KRW 80 million to C’s account through the Defendant’s wife while having to repay a loan to the I Bank by a limited liability company C (hereinafter “C”), but D and J embezzled the said money without using it for repayment of the loan.
After that, D et al. transferred KRW 10 million among the above 80 million embezzled, which was partially embezzled, to C account under the name of its mother on February 20, 2014.
B) Around April 3, 2014, the Defendant borrowed KRW 60 million from the victim E on or around April 3, 2014, the Defendant borrowed KRW 60 million from the victim E; however, at the time of borrowing, the Defendant was unaware of the victim and had no intention to acquire the defrauded because he was unaware of the victim at the time of receiving the return of the H golf course membership fee, and there was no intention to repay and the ability to repay. 2) The Defendant embezzled KRW 80 million around February 26, 2013, and the Defendant was not aware of the lower judgment. The Defendant remitted KRW 80,000,000 to C’s principal transaction account to use it for repayment of the loan to the I Bank on or around February 26, 2013.