beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.29 2015노1106

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of borrowing money from the victim, promised to obtain a loan of KRW 3-400 million from F. If the situation is not good, he/she was able to receive a retirement allowance of KRW 300 million, and thus, he/she had the intent and ability to pay the money to the victim.

Therefore, the defendant did not deceiving the victim and did not have the intention of defraudation.

B. The first instance sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged in accordance with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant, even though there was no intent or ability to repay money within a short period as stated in the judgment of the first instance, deceiving the victim and received KRW 250 million from the victim can be sufficiently recognized.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

① At the time of borrowing money from the victim, the Defendant had been urged to repay debts from the other party while the Defendant and the financial institutions bear obligations exceeding KRW 600 million without any particular property.

The defendant was planning to repay the debt to a person who borrowed money from the victim.

Nevertheless, if the defendant borrowed money without notifying the victim of the above circumstances, he would use it as the business fund of the same student and would complete the payment within this framework.

② The Defendant asserts that F made a promise to lend KRW 3-400 million to F, and that F borrowed money from the victim.

However, F is only dependent on the F's subparagraphs as a customer of the Defendant's bank transactions and does not have a relationship with the Defendant to demand a loan of money within a given period.

It is not a situation in which money is deposited into the F's account at the time, but the F lends money when it receives investment money at the end of December 2010 as planned.