logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.09.18 2019노2512
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (definite and misunderstanding of legal principles), the defendant is recognized to have deceiving the victim according to the statement by witness D and J of the court below. Since the defendant does not fully repay the relevant money from the victim until the long time after borrowing the money from the victim, the criminal intent of the defendant is also recognized.

2. Determination

A. The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor based on the circumstances stated in Chapters 5 through 8 of the judgment of the lower court regarding the facts charged of this case is insufficient to deem the facts charged of this case to have been proven without any reasonable doubt.

B. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the Defendant was aware that the Defendant failed to pay the above borrowed money ex post facto, and the Defendant was aware of the intent to defraud the Defendant beyond the civil liability at the time of borrowing.

Therefore, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misconception of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is groundless.

① Since May 2013, the Defendant was unable to pay the Plaintiff the fraternity or interest related to the borrowed money of this case, and the Defendant’s credit rating sharply lowered from June 2013 (the trial record 158 pages, 204 pages). ② The victim stated in the investigative agency that “A would not lend absolute money if he knew that the amount of money borrowed from another person would have been so increased” (No. 1 right 98 pages of the evidence record), but the record submitted by the victim alone is objective in terms of the amount of the Defendant’s debt to a third party other than the victim, the time of occurrence, etc.

arrow