beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant's judgment [2012 Highest 1309] is sentenced to six months of imprisonment, and the judgment [2012 Highest 1309].
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts: the judgment of the court below [2013 Godan3168] (hereinafter referred to as "the judgment of the court below"), which was held [2013 Godan3168], only led the defendant to connect the victim W et al. with Co-defendant V, and did not deceiving the victim in collusion with V, thereby deceiving him, and the defendant was transferred from AF around November 20, 2012. Since the defendant entered into a vehicle sales contract in the name of the mother of the defendant, and again received as compensation for transfer of the released vehicle to AF through V, the court below convicted the defendant of the facts charged, regardless of no relation with the victim's damage caused by the victim's fraud, the court below erred [2013 Godan3168].
B. It is unreasonable that the lower court sentenced each of the two years of imprisonment with prison labor for each of the crimes other than the crimes in the judgment of the lower court [2012 Highest 1309] as to the Defendant’s [2012 Highest 1309] and [2012 Highest 1309] decision
2. Determination
A. Ex officio determination: (a) the judgment of the court below [2012 Godan1309] is ex officio prior to the judgment of the defendant on the grounds for appeal; and (b) the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged [2012 Godan1309] and accepted the attached list of crimes in the facts of the crime of the court below, but the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the omission of "the list of crimes" in the attached list in the judgment of the court below, which did not specify the facts of the crime of the crime [2012 Godan1309]; and (c) the part of the judgment of the court below as to the crime [2012
B. Determination of misunderstanding of facts: According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the crime [2013No3168] in the judgment of the court below, the defendant conspired with co-defendant 5 of the court below as to the crime [2013No3168] as stated in the crime in the judgment of the court below, there was no intention or ability to receive a loan from the victim W husband and Y, and the vehicle is in the victim's name.