beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2013.06.21 2013노452

사기등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed on the Defendant by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, and 30 million won of additional collection charges) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the victim's specific and consistent statements on the date, time, place, circumstance, etc. of the victim's transfer of money to the defendant, the court below found the defendant not guilty (hereinafter "this part of the charges"), but the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the charges, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. On January 2009, the Defendant issued a false statement to the victim D at his own house located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, that “The police, prosecution, and court officials are not responsible for it, and the four business places are not controlled, and even if they are subject to control, the Defendant would change the entertainment expenses to be handled smoothly by force.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to make a solicitation against the public official in charge in order to avoid punishment when the victim's multi-faceted measures are prevented or regulated.

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as such; (b) received 4 million won as entertainment expenses, etc. for public officials from the victim, that is, from the victim’s seat; (c) and (d) received from the victim a total of 24 million won for eight occasions in the same place from around that time to around 201, as follows.

As a result, the defendant was paid money and valuables under the pretext of deceiving the victim and receiving 24 million won and at the same time soliciting affairs handled by the public officials.

① 4 million won around the time of the Gu administration in 2009, ② 5 million won around the time of drilling, ③.