사기등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The defendant pays 27,00,000 won to the applicant for compensation by fraud.
3.2
1. The court below accepted each application for compensation filed by B, C, and D and rejected the application for compensation filed by E, the applicant for compensation, and the part of the compensation order pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings by the defendant filing an appeal shall be deemed to have also been appealed.
However, although the defendant and his defense counsel did not state the grounds for appeal regarding the part of the order for compensation in the petition of appeal and the statement of grounds of appeal submitted, and even if ex officio examination, it cannot find the grounds for revocation and modification of this part, and therefore,
On the other hand, an applicant cannot file an objection against the judgment that dismissed or partially admitted an application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Since the rejection part of the application for compensation against E, who is the applicant for compensation, has been immediately determined, the rejection part of the application for compensation among the judgment below
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant made a false confession of the fact that he/she had been engaged in the prosecution investigation process and the public contest in the original trial process by deceiving the investigator’s meeting, but in fact, he/she was aware that he/she was engaged in legitimate business as an employee of the lending company.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a 3 years of imprisonment, 1 to 4) is too unreasonable.
3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. Determination of the credibility of a confession made by a defendant shall be made in consideration of all the circumstances, including whether the content of the confession statement itself is objectively rational, what is the motive or reason for the confession, what is the circumstance leading to the confession, and what does not conflict with or contradictory to the confession among the circumstantial evidence other than the confession, when determining the credibility of a confession made by a defendant.
Furthermore, the defendant is consistently from the investigative agency to the date of trial.