beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months.
seizure.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (unfair imprisonment) is too unreasonable for Defendant A (two years of imprisonment) to be sentenced.
B. In light of the roles performed by Defendant A by Defendant A of mistake of facts (the responsibility for collection and deposit in cash), the method of using money at the time of cash collection (a false position is used), and the amount acquired by deception, etc., the lower court held that Defendant A was sufficiently liable to commit a crime of fraud. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) In so doing, the lower court’s each sentence against Defendant B, C, and D (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) on the grounds that it is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts against Defendant A
A. A. A joint principal offender under Article 30 of the relevant legal doctrine commits a crime jointly by two or more persons. In order to constitute a joint principal offender, it is necessary for the joint principal offender to commit a crime through functional control by the joint doctor, which is a subjective requirement, through functional control by the joint doctor, which is an objective requirement, and the intention of joint process is one of the two to commit a specific criminal act with the intention of joint principal, and it is intended to transfer one’s own intent by using another’s act.
(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s intent to commit a crime under Article 10 of the Criminal Procedure Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2001, Apr. 7, 2000; Presidential Decree No. 20010, Nov. 2, 2001; Presidential Decree No. 200135, Apr. 2, 2001; Presidential Decree No. 20135, Apr. 2, 2001; Presidential Decree No. 20135, Apr. 1, 200).
(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6706 Decided September 11, 2008, etc.). B.