변호사법위반등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the Defendant did not have any ability or intent to use the said money to the investigator of the public prosecutor's office in relation to the case, including the case in which the injured party C received money from the investigator of the public prosecutor's office under the pretext of exerting power.
Nevertheless, around June 23, 2014, the Defendant appointed an attorney-at-law to the victim before the new bank ATM period located in the Seoul Southern District Court 1, Seoul Southern District Court located in Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, Seoul, and the other party who filed a complaint against the party, but the party did not appoint an attorney-at-law. As such, the Defendant ought to write down against the Plaintiff’s damages.
Since there is a person who knows about 5 million won in the face of the 5.0 million won in the face of the public prosecutor's office, it is fair to ensure that the trial of the case that the party filed a complaint is not biased to the other party.
“Along with the victim’s deception, the victim was issued KRW 5 million on the same day by deceiving the victim.”
After all, the Defendant received money from the injured party under the pretext of solicitation or mediation for cases or affairs handled by public officials as above, and acquired it by fraud.
2. The judgment of the court below is consistent with the fact that “A witness reverses his/her statement on the date and time he/she made money to the defendant, but he/she received the card theory, and he/she gave it before the branch court of the Southern District Court of the Nam-gu branch of the Seoul District Court. In light of the fact that the above witness and the defendant’s text message received and sent to him/her, and the contents of the transcript are consistent with the witness’s statement, the above witness’s legal statement is credibility.
on the ground that “the Defendant was guilty.”
3. The gist of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) was as follows: (a) the Defendant did not receive KRW 5 million from the injured party on or around June 23, 2014; (b) the lower court found the Defendant guilty by recognizing the facts charged.
4. The injured party shall be admitted as evidence to prove the facts charged for the deliberation of the political party.