특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months.
Defendant
B.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles by deceiving B, and there was land equivalent to KRW 300 billion owned by E, which is the assistance of B, and only he believed to be a securities person who received land expropriation compensation from B through a third party donation or onerous donation, and received and delivered money in the name of expenses from the victims. Therefore, the Defendant is only a victim who was deceptiond from B, and there was no intention to obtain money from victims, and there was no conspiracy of the crime of this case between B and B. 2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant B (unfair imprisonment of eight years) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. Although Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles regarding the crime of defraudation, the lower court’s determination that Defendant A purchased the land owned by E from the victims even though Defendant A did not purchase the land from the victims, it constitutes deception against the victims, and it constitutes a designated donee who was entitled to receive compensation for the said land by winning the case after the death of E, but became a designated donee who was entitled to receive compensation for the said land in a subsequent trial, and the intent of defraudation is also acknowledged.
B) (1) The deception as a requirement for fraud of the relevant legal doctrine refers to any affirmative or passive act that generally assumes the fiduciary duty and good faith to each other in relation to property transaction. It is sufficient to say that it does not necessarily require false indication as to the important part of a juristic act, and it is a basis for the judgment to allow an actor to perform a disposal act he/she wishes by omitting the other party into mistake (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do9644, Jan. 16, 2014). Meanwhile, fraud is established.