특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are reversed, respectively.
Defendant
D 3 years of imprisonment with prison labor for life or for defendant L.
As to the Defendants’ misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles, Defendant A’s statement to the effect that he murdered the Victim G according to Defendant D’s intention is in itself inconsistent with the logical and empirical rules, and is inconsistent with objective facts.
Defendant
D There is no fact that Defendant A instructed the murder, and there is no motive for murdering Victim G.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which recognized the liability for murdering to Defendant D is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
As to the remaining facts charged (Defendant D, L, and BF) network F did not have a mental state of dementia from around October 2016, the documents prepared by the networkF and the documents written by the statement are inadmissible.
Nevertheless, the court below did not have donated domestic property to Defendant D solely on the basis of the statement of the networkF without admissibility and the circumstantial evidence unfavorable to the Defendants.
The lower court determined that it was “a fact.”
The punishment (the defendants) that the court below sentenced to the defendants (the imprisonment with prison labor for defendant D life, three years of imprisonment with prison labor for defendant L, one year and six years of imprisonment with prison labor for defendant BF, and two years of imprisonment with prison labor for defendant A) is too unreasonable.
The prosecutor (with respect to Defendant L, BF)’s sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant L and BF is too unhued and unreasonable.
On September 3, 2018, the prosecutor filed an application with this court for permission to amend an indictment to amend the facts charged in the instant case No. 2017 high 1034 among the lower judgment judgment on September 3, 2018 (the amended details are the same as the facts charged in the first instance judgment). On September 4, 2018, among the lower judgment on September 1, 2018, the Defendant filed an application for permission to revise an indictment to partially correct the facts charged in the instant case No. 1067 high Gohap 1067 and the facts charged in the second instance judgment (the contents of the correction are the same as those stated in the relevant facts charged in the instant judgment of KRW 1 and 2). This court on September 1, 2018.