특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months.
However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendants (unfair sentencing)’ punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The Defendants solicited the victims to make joint investments in the context of the instant crime by mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles (not guilty part). Accordingly, the Defendants issued the investment funds by setting the internal investment ratio among the victims.
Since the defendants committed a single crime with the intent of deceiving 660 million won in total from the victims, it is reasonable to rate them as a single crime.
Nevertheless, there is a relation of criminal fraud against victims with substantive concurrent crimes.
In light of the above, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes.
2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination ex officio and prosecutor’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendants did not have the ability to purchase the land of I, J, and K (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) at the time of harmony. On December 7, 2009, when they invested KRW 60 million to the victims M, N, andO on the real estate located in Sungsung-si on December 7, 2009, they would purchase the instant real estate and sell it to a third party as the site for electric power resource, and then give the principal and proceeds.
“A false statement” was received from victims totaling KRW 660 million ( KRW 460 million from the victim N, KRW 110 million from the victimO, KRW 90 million from the victim M).
The prosecutor prosecuted the instant facts charged as a single comprehensive crime by applying Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, and the lower court committed the Defendants’ crimes.