beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.11.30 2017노3867

사기등

Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Fact-finding G and H’s funds of USD 63 million from the Republic of Korea. However, it is true that the investment wife did not pay the investment money due to the circumstances such as the delay in financing distribution and not allowing approval from the foreign exchange bank and the Financial Supervisory Service, because it merely did not pay the investment money due to the fact that the investment wife is a number of places including the victim F.

In addition, since documents submitted by the defendant are true, the forgery and use of private documents is not established.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant introduced the victim F as a Korean investment manager of H, a corporation, and H, a corporation, Hah, Hah, Hah, located in Singapore, to the victim F, and made an investment of USD 63 million in Korea, and thus, it would be invested in E, a corporation operating the victim.

(2) The Defendant: (a) received money and valuables equivalent to KRW 33,50,000,000,000 from G employees under the pretext of requesting and receiving KRW 30,000 from the victim to make the above investment in Indonesia over three times; and (b) received money and valuables equivalent to KRW 33,55,00,00 in total, such as bribe, 33,00,00, and credit card payments, from G employees, under the pretext of having entered Indonesia to hold investment consultations; (c) the Defendant immediately stated that the Plaintiff would have become a sexual intercourse in the above process and received money and valuables, but did not actually make an investment; and (d) the Defendant received an investigation from the police and submitted a forged document in the name of the foreign exchange bank stating that he has any official authority between the foreign exchange bank