사기등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The accused shall order the compensation applicant to pay KRW 63,772,630 and this compensation order.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Fact-finding 1) The Defendant, at the victim’s request, has partially stored the agricultural bank account in the name of the victim. However, some of the above loans were withdrawn in cash with the victim, or remitted from the agricultural bank account in the name of the victim (2 million won deposited in the Business Love on September 5, 201), and the victim stated at the investigative agency that W was the person with whom W was well aware.
2) Since the Defendant was transferred to the Defendant, it cannot be readily concluded that all of the loans specified in Table 2 of the judgment below were used by the Defendant. Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of all of the facts charged. However, there was an error of law by misunderstanding facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Since the victim of the credit card use fraud stated in the investigation agency that the Defendant permitted the use of the card within the limit of 2 million won when paying the card to the Defendant, the Defendant’s use of the card is constituted a fraud of card use only for the portion exceeding two million won out of KRW 4,297
Nevertheless, the court below convicted all of the facts charged, and the court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
3) Although the Defendant used “F” mobile phones as of August 23, 201 at the victim’s request, the Defendant did not open or use four mobile phones in the name of the victim, such as the statement in the list of crimes in the lower court. Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges, which was erroneous in the lower court’s mistake of facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts shall be based on a comprehensive statement of witness D in the lower court.