사기
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Since each of the instant machinery in this case was unaware of the existing collateral security, the Defendant did not have the intention to obtain fraud, it is merely a delivery of the loan to the Defendant by negligence that the victim did not verify the collateral security relationship.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, thereby adversely affecting the judgment.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment with labor for four months and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
2. The Defendant alleged to the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of fact, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.
In addition to the following circumstances, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no error of law by mistake of facts alleged by the defendant, considering the circumstances that the court below and the appellate court duly adopted and examined the evidence.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.
① Even before the instant case, the Defendant concluded a mortgage contract with the instant factory, its site, internal machinery, etc. as a collateral. The details of each contract were modified in little amount, and each contract was accompanied by the list of machinery as a collateral.
In light of the above transaction experience and history of the defendant, it is reasonable to view that the defendant was aware that the machinery in the factory of this case was already provided as a security.
② Each of the instant machinery appears to have been additionally included in the security upon purchasing the machinery of this case by the Defendant, and concluding a contract for the modification of the right to collateral security on March 18, 2010. According to the foregoing, the machinery of this case shall be provided as collateral during the process of concluding a contract or negotiations.