사기등
The judgment below
Among them, the part on the joint fraud against Defendant A is reversed, and the prosecutor on this part is a prosecutor.
1. The lower court affirmed the first instance judgment which acquitted the Defendants on the charge of joint fraud among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds that there was no proof as to the Defendants’ collusion in collusion between the Defendants, on the following grounds: (a) the purchase price of the instant land by Defendant B’s husband L and the development permission for the said land; (b) the process of concluding and executing a sales contract for the instant land; and (c) the relationship between the Defendants and the victims.
Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
2. Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that an appellate court shall dismiss an appeal by judgment when it deems that the appeal is groundless.
According to the records, among the facts charged in the case of this case, the prosecutor appealedd not guilty and appealed by the first instance court as to the joint fraud against the defendant A, and the court below determined that the prosecutor's appeal concerning this part is groundless, but the court below did not dismiss the appeal in its order. Thus, the court below erred by violating Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6432, Sept. 14, 2006). Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below as to the joint fraud against the defendant A among the facts charged in this case is reversed, but this part of the case is sufficient to be decided by this court, and thus, it is directly decided by Article 396 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Of the facts charged in the instant case, the gist of the prosecutor’s appeal regarding the joint fraud against Defendant A is that according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the prosecutor may find the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, but the fact of the first instance judgment was erroneous.
However, the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is recorded.