beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.12.11 2014노3325

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

except that for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (four months of imprisonment) on Defendant A’s summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant A and the records of this case, Defendant B received the notification of the receipt of the trial records on October 23, 2014 (Article 186(1) of the Civil Procedure Act concerning supplementary service under Article 65 of the Criminal Procedure Act applies mutatis mutandis to the criminal procedure where Defendant B received the notification of the receipt of the trial records on October 23, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 9Mo25, Feb. 14, 2000). Since the documents were delivered to the family living together with the Defendant and the family living together with him/her were not aware of the contents of the documents, the service is effective even if the Defendant did not know of the contents of the documents (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 9Mo225, Feb. 14, 200). The notification of the receipt of the trial records as a person living together with the Defendant was not filed within 20

The above Defendant filed a statement of grounds of appeal on November 13, 2014, which was subsequent to the filing period for the grounds of appeal, on the grounds of unfair sentencing, but this does not constitute legitimate grounds of appeal. As such, Defendant A’s judgment on the grounds of appeal and the part on Defendant B ought to be examined ex officio.

Although the judgment of ex officio as to Eul, the amount of the defraudedation of this case does not exceed KRW 40 million, the defendants recognized the facts charged of this case and reflect their mistakes in depth, Defendant A paid KRW 6 million after Defendant B paid the amount of KRW 2 million at the original trial, Defendant B paid the total of KRW 12 million, Defendant B paid the total of KRW 4 million, and the agreement with the victim was reached, and the defendants would have to fully repay the remaining amount of damage in the future. At the time of the crime of this case, the defendants were the same criminal records.