beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.01.18 2017노1358

사기

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles) was in a situation in which the Defendant could not charge the valid votes ratio exceeding 10% while going through the election in the former main market as the candidate for K political party, and was supplied with promotional materials for election by the injured party despite being aware that the valid votes ratio is not more than 10%, and even if the Defendant did not have the ability to pay the amount, he could not be paid the amount, and even if he did not fully recognize the criminal intent of defraudation due to his intention or ability to pay the amount, the lower court determined that the Defendant

2. On June 4, 2014, the Defendant, on the summary of the facts charged, told the victim E, the representative of the “D” and the F, who is his employee, to normally pay the price of supply at the center office in the Seoul Long-gu Medical Care Center located in the Jeonjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City around March 2014, the Defendant called “a request to deliver promotional materials for election”.

However, there was no intention or ability to pay the price even if the election campaign materials are supplied by the injured party.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, obtained a large amount of election campaign material equivalent to KRW 22,858,000 from April 2, 2014 to June 2, 2014, including large banner, shoulder belt, illumination, name tag, publicity board, etc. of the external wall for election from the victim to the victim, and acquired it by deceiving the victim.

3. Determination

A. The lower court’s judgment, based on the records, found the facts as indicated in its reasoning, and comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the facts related thereto and evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the evidence alone, which was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that the Defendant had a criminal intent to defraud the Defendant from the time when the Defendant was supplied with promotional materials for election.

The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant charges on the ground that it cannot be seen.

(i)..