logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.06.13 2014노163
사기
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (De facto mistake and unreasonable sentencing) (i.e., mistake of facts) at the time of commencing the instant project, the Defendant had the exclusive right to use the instant patent by obtaining the consent or understanding on the use of the instant patent right from G, which is the patentee of the instant patent, and Q, which is, at the time of entering into force of the instant project, on the grounds that the Defendant had the exclusive right to use the instant patent by obtaining the consent or understanding on the use of the patent right from G, Inc. and Q, thereby not being deemed to have

Dob. The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (i) In order to establish fraud as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, there must be a successive causal relationship between deception and the other party’s mistake and the granting of property or pecuniary gain. However, even if there is negligence on the part of the defrauded among the causes of mistake, fraud is established. Meanwhile, as long as the Defendant does not make a confession, the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, shall be determined by taking into account objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, the process of performing transactions, etc., before and after the crime, and the criminal intent is not a conclusive intention, but a willful

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10416 Decided February 28, 2008, and Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1697 Decided June 23, 2009, etc.). The following facts and circumstances are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court.

㈎ 피고인이 해파리를 이용한 화장품 원료를 제조하는 이 사건 사업을 시행하기 위해서는 ‘해파리를 이용한 발효 조성물 및 그의 제조방법’에 관한 이 사건 특허발명이 반드시 필요한데, 이 사건 사업을 시작할 당시 피고인은 이 사건 특허의...

arrow