beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.06.21 2018노6562

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The defendant does not pay this fine.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal and the defense counsel asserted that “the verdict of innocence should be pronounced on the guilty part of the original judgment (the crime of defraudation of KRW 1 million around July 27, 2016)” on the second trial date following the expiration of the period for submitting the grounds for appeal, but this does not constitute legitimate grounds for appeal, and even after ex officio examination, there seems to be an error of misconception of facts as alleged above in the judgment of the court below which found the guilty of the above facts charged, and thus, no separate judgment shall be made.

In addition to the guilty verdict of the lower court, the lower court cannot be readily concluded that the Defendant borrowed the victim with the intention of defraudation from the beginning, even though the Defendant deceivings the victim, and thereby deceiving the victim, he/she received the remittance of KRW 19.52 million from the victim.

It is difficult to readily conclude that the money received from the victim (in the case of Nos. 1 and 2 of the attached Table of Crimes) is the borrowed money.

(In the case of Nos. 4 through 8 of the same table) judged not guilty on the ground of the same table.

The court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of a fine) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Around July 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract with the victim to manufacture and deliver a “D” product name, which is a disposable package attached to a new flaps.

On August 8, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that the Defendant would repay the amount of gold necessary to produce products under the above contract to the victim if he/she borrowed KRW 3 million to the victim.

In fact, the defendant is a person with bad credit standing at the time, and the state of national tax was delinquent, and even if he borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to pay it at the time.