beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.07.17 2013노197

사기등

Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by ten months of imprisonment.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is mistake of facts (i.e., fraud with regard to victim C: 32 million won on September 7, 2010 (the facts of prosecution).

(B) It was not borrowed but borrowed money, and it was not paid to D, a multi-level distributor to which the victim belongs, in order to raise the victim's position at the victim's request by the victim's sub-level distributor, that is, the amount paid as expenses for registration and business activities of the multi-level salesman's agency. The defendant provided that "the defendant shall pay the borrowed money before and after one month," and that "the defendant shall pay the borrowed money in advance because he/she has received three billion won of the borrowed money immediately," and that "the defendant shall pay the borrowed money in advance." < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 22640, Dec. 27, 2010>

A) The victim is the money that the victim invested in a new food business of the defendant, and the defendant did not have the statement that "the defendant can pay sufficient amount of money to KRW 3 billion due to delayed missionary work funds." ② In relation to the fraud of the victim E (defendant 2.) (the facts of prosecution): The defendant made the victim as the highest class in return for investing one billion won in D out of KRW 3 billion of the missionary work funds to be received in Korea: D president G and confidential promise are already made by the defendant. There was no fact that the defendant made the statement that "it is necessary to use funds to take over the order of receiving missionary work funds, and only borrowed money for the defendant's food business) and unfair sentencing.2. The decision of this court was made on February 2, 197.

A. The following circumstances acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the first instance court and the trial court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, etc.: (i) prepare and provide a loan certificate for the money received from the victim C even if the Defendant was ex post facto, and (ii) stated that the Defendant talked with the victim C about the money for the missionary work around September 7, 2010 (Evidence Records 406, 407 pages), and (iii) the above missionary work funds are set forth by the Defendant.