사기
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. According to the consistent statement of the victim D and the statement of F corresponding thereto, etc. of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the defendant can fully recognize the fact that he/she received share certificates by deceiving the victim as if he/she would raise the value of the shares to KRW 1,00 per share within two months and the criminal intent of defrauding the defendant.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the rules of evidence.
2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio.
On July 17, 2018, a prosecutor changed the name of the crime as stated in the facts charged at the trial of the party and the name of the crime as stated in the revised facts charged, and applied legal provisions to “Embezzlement” as “Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act,” and applied legal provisions to “alternatively add the facts charged” as stated in the attached Form “alternative facts charged,” and applied for the amendment of the indictment to which the facts charged are added alternatively, and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.
However, there are such reasons for ex officio reversal.
Even if the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope related to the revised primary facts charged, it shall be examined below (Provided, That as long as the court recognizes the conviction of primary facts charged in the trial as follows, it shall not be judged separately as the determination of conviction of the additional facts charged in the selective relation). 3. The prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts on March 1
A. A. The modified part of the previous facts charged shall be indicated as the bottom of the revised facts charged.
On June 21, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for a violation of the Securities Transaction Act at the Seoul Central District Court, which was sentenced to three years of imprisonment for a violation of the Securities Transaction Act, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 1, 201, and on October 24, 2014, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced a suspended sentence of two years and six months for a violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act. < Amended by Act No. 13485, Aug. 27, 2015>