beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than four months.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant B (1) In the course of the Defendant’s business promotion, there was a misunderstanding of the fact that the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged person; however, in light of the Defendant’s financial capability at the time of repayment, etc., the Defendant deceiving
Although it cannot be seen, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged against the Defendant.
(2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The judgment of the court below which did not recognize the fact that the defendant A conspiredd with the defendant B by denying the prosecutor's (1) misunderstanding the facts (the victim's specific and consistent statement against the defendant A) in a timely manner, and did not mislead the defendant A of the fact.
(2) Improper sentencing (with respect to Defendant B), the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant B’s assertion of mistake, the lower court may sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant obtained economic benefits as stated in its reasoning by having the victim pay the cost of using mobile phones, vehicle rent, etc. even though the Defendant was unable to preserve the cost by conducting apartment sales agency business or operating online lecture system.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is just and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts as pointed out by the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.
① On June 20, 2013, as the representative of the Defendant Company E, the Defendant would purchase all of the above apartments by paying the 222 households of apartment sold by I by public auction to the sales contract deposit, plus the amount of KRW 8.2 billion, which is 10% of the sales price.