사기
The judgment below
The remainder, excluding a compensation order, shall be reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
The Defendant, who is aware of the summary of the grounds for appeal, only requested insurance proceeds to B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “B”) after receiving a normally diagnosis from a veterinarian G with respect to a lawsuit filed for injury, difficult childbirth, etc., which is not a normal lawsuit, and did not deceiving B as stated in the facts charged of this case and by deceiving the insurance proceeds.
The punishment of the court below (1.5 million won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.
The summary of the facts charged as to the assertion of mistake in fact is that the Defendant: (a) was a person operating the D farm in Asia-si; and (b) had normally shipped the Defendant’s normal lawsuit (this vote number: E) on March 20, 201, around March 20, 201, the Defendant prepared a false sales contract under which the said lawsuit was sold at KRW 100,000,000 to F, a livestock trader, as if the said lawsuit was not non-permanent; and (c) written indictment under which the said lawsuit was sold from the veterinarian G as “f,” but it appears to be a clerical error in the letter of indictment to be “gradation” and it is likely to have a substantial disadvantage in exercising the Defendant’s right to defense, even if written in its reasoning without going through
As can not be seen, it shall be corrected and stated without a separate amendment process.
After receipt of a false medical certificate that he/she sustained injury, the above lawsuit was prepared for three copies of the photograph that he/she sits to appear as non-permanently impossible, and on March 28, 2011, the victim B filed a claim for livestock disaster insurance money in the course of submitting a false contract, medical certificate, photograph, etc. as above, and the victim B received KRW 792,00 from the victim on April 1, 201, as well as the delivery of KRW 792,00 as the insurance money for livestock disaster on April 1, 2011, and acquired KRW 4,660,440 on five occasions, such as in the list of crimes as shown in the attached Table of the judgment of the court below.
Along with the fact that the cattle recorded in the facts charged in the instant case was diagnosed by a veterinarian G by an injury, such as cirratation, etc., all were slaughtered in normal cattle.