beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine, each crime No. 1 through No. 6 of the annexed crime list of the lower judgment was completed, and thus, the judgment of acquittal should be pronounced on this part.
Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In the judgment of fraud as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, where the money was acquired through deception several times against the same victim, if the criminal intent is single and the method of the crime is identical, only the inclusive crime of fraud is established (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do10948, Oct. 29, 2015). The statute of limitations for a single single crime begins from the time the last criminal act was committed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2939, Oct. 11, 2002). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant can be recognized as having the identity of the criminal act in light of the following: (a) the victim, “I wish to use the money in advance if I lend money to the same victim; and (b) the defendant borrowed money from June 25, 2009 to September 19, 2013.
Therefore, a comprehensive crime is established against the whole crime by deceiving 73,960,000 won from the injured party. In the case of a comprehensive crime, the statute of limitations for the public prosecution proceeds from the end of the crime. Since it is apparent in the record that the prosecutor brought a public prosecution on September 3, 2013, before the lapse of 10 years, which is the statute of limitations for the public prosecution, from September 3, 2013, the day on which the crime was completed to the end of the crime, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty at the same time as 7 to 19.