beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.11.03 2016노499

사기등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1’s mistake of facts and defense counsel appealed on the grounds of misapprehending the legal principles and unreasonable sentencing during the second trial of the trial of the party, and stated that the objective facts are acknowledged, but the criminal intent is denied. However, the statement in the grounds of appeal contains a statement that appears to the purport of alleging mistake of facts, and the statement in the grounds of appeal contains a statement that the defense counsel submitted after the above trial date and the defendant’s examination do

In relation to the fraud of Paragraph (1) of the facts charged in this case and the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, the defendant only received 10,500,000 won in cash from the victims in terms of living expenses by jointly providing environment-friendly materials and ordering construction works with victims, and there was no intention to commit fraud by deceiving victims under the pretext of soliciting the affairs handled by the public officials.

Even if the defendant received money under the pretext of solicitation for the affairs handled by a public official, since the defendant was not in the position of a person in charge of another's affairs, but the defendant was in a relationship of performing affairs jointly with the victims, the defendant's act does not constitute a violation of

With regard to the fraud of Paragraph 2 of the facts charged in this case, the defendant only spent 21,350,000 won in total with the office of the victims and the defendant's studio deposit, and the credit card price for business purpose with the victims to conduct joint work as above, and there was no intention to commit fraud by deceiving the victims to take out the construction work, and there was no intention to commit fraud.

In addition, the parties to the studio and the office rental contract are not the defendant, but the victims also have the obligation to return the deposit to the lessor.

참조조문