사기
1. The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A is reversed.
2. The defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months;
3...
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant A, with respect to the Defendant A, had the victim E and G provided a pro quo or received a full payment of the money, but did not have any intent or ability to do so, by deceiving the victims as stated in the facts charged, and acquired the money as a down payment, and there is sufficient evidence to support it.
Nevertheless, the court below pronounced innocence on the ground that there is no proof of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B) Defendant B, in collusion with Defendant A, by deceiving the victim E, F, L, M, and N as stated in the facts charged, and by deceiving the victim E, F, L, M, and N, and even though there is sufficient evidence to support this, the lower court acquitted Defendant B on the ground that there is no evidence to prove this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court against Defendant A is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant A’s erroneous determination of facts was made by the victim E, F, L, M, N, etc. upon the request of the victim E, F, M, N, etc., and only introduced the above victims B, and there was no fact that the above victims entered into a land shipment contract with the above victims and was supplied with the meat.
Even if it is recognized that Defendant A entered into a milk shipment contract with the above victims and received the meat, Defendant A was unable to pay the amount of KRW 500,000,000 due to Defendant B’s failure to pay the amount of KRW 500,000 to the above victims. Thus, Defendant A did not have any criminal intent to acquire the meat.
Nevertheless, the court below accepted this part of the facts charged as it is and convicted Defendant A, and the judgment of the court below is erroneous.