beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2013.10.10 2013노2101

사기

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

According to the victim's consistent statement that the defendant's statement about the reasons for receiving KRW 30 million from the victim is difficult to believe due to lack of consistency, and that the defendant delivered KRW 30 million to the defendant's oral statement that he will make repayment in a short period of time, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the facts charged and acquired money, but the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts that the court below erred

Judgment

In a criminal trial, the burden of proving the facts constituting the crime prosecuted is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected of guilty.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(2) In light of the records, the court below’s determination that the Defendant’s receipt of KRW 30 million from the victim was made by deception as stated in the facts charged is difficult, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, was working as a management director in the G company that was operated as the head, and (b) the Defendant received I by investing KRW 200 million; and (c) the Defendant and the victim did not prepare all documents, such as a loan certificate, in light of the small amount of money transaction of KRW 30 million in the instant case, on several occasions before the instant transaction was conducted between the Defendant and the victim; and (d) on the grounds stated in its reasoning, it is difficult to acknowledge that the Defendant received KRW 30 million from the victim, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning: (a) the amount of money deposited in the account between the Defendant and the victim exceeds the amount paid by the Defendant to the victim.