beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.06.16 2016노1203

사기

Text

All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the circumstances such as the following: (a) Defendant A (misunderstanding of facts) lent money in trust to Defendant A; (b) the Defendant committed the instant fraud in collusion with B, taking account of the following: (c) the Defendant was aware that money was invested in the instant business with a high possibility of success even though he did not invest in the instant business; and (d) the Defendant was aware that money received from the injured party was used for a purpose unrelated to the instant business, as the Defendant managed and disbursed at the request of B; and (c) the money was used for a purpose unrelated to

full recognition may be accepted.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below (unfair sentencing) against Defendant B (one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too uneasy and unfair.

2. Determination

A. On April 23, 2010, the summary of this part of the facts charged and the Defendant and B concluded that the victim D would construct an apartment on the site outside E and four lots in the mutual infinite-dong commercial area at the time of light-wise, Jeoncheon-si around April 23, 2010, “I will use 3.7 million won as construction expenses on loan and pay KRW 70 million after sale.”

However, the above site was not subject to authorization or permission that can construct apartment because it fell under the national land planning management area, and the defendant and B also thought that the above price was used for personal purposes.

The Defendant, in collusion with B, by deceiving the victim as such, received a cash of KRW 10 million from the injured party on April 26, 2010, KRW 20 million on or around December 1, 2010, and KRW 7 million on or around April 20, 201, respectively, for the purpose of a cash loan. < Amended by Act No. 1032, Apr. 20, 2011>

2) The judgment of the court below is based on the belief that the Defendant may construct an apartment building and delivered the content to the victim as it is and did not acquire the money by deceiving the victim in collusion with B.