beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.06.13 2013노4441

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant merely lent the passbook in the name of the Defendant to H, and did not deceiving the victim and did not know the fact of the crime of H, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant to have committed the crime of fraud of this case in collusion with H was erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts.

B. In light of the fact that the defendant has no criminal power for the same kind of crime and the defendant's economic situation, the sentence of the court below (7 million won of a fine) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. In the case of accomplices who are jointly processed by two or more persons on the assertion of mistake of facts, the conspiracy is not legally required, but is a combination of two or more persons to realize a crime through the joint processing of crimes. Although there was no process of the whole conspiracy, if the combination of the intentions is made in order or impliedly, the conspiracy is established between several persons, and even if there was no direct participation in the conduct, the person is held liable as co-principal for the other conspiracy's act.

(2) The Defendant: (a) entered into a contract with H on a monthly basis and entered into a lawsuit with the victim on several occasions; and (b) entered into a private financial office with the victim on several occasions by using the weekends; and (c) the Defendant, while operating a private financial office with the victim’s card discount and merchandise coupon trading in Seoul, issued the name of the credit service office, and the Defendant, along with H, issued the name of the Defendant, who entered into a loan service office with the victim on one-month basis; and (d) entered the contract with H on one-month basis; and (e) entered the contract with H on one-month basis; and (e) entered the contract with the victim on one-month basis; and (e) entered a private financial office, which deals with the victim’s card discount and merchandise coupon trading in Seoul; and (e) the Defendant was actually named “I” as “I”.