(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.01.14 2014노1719

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.01.14 2014노1719

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by misunderstanding the fact, borrowed a credit card from the injured party to use the card to purchase goods by the injured party, G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), and said that the amount of use would be paid by the F, a representative director of G.

Since then, after the G employee used the above card, he returned the card to the victim via the Defendant, and the amount of use was decided by G to pay the price of goods from the shopping company (hereinafter “slot shopping”), G’s creditor failed to pay the price of goods normally on the wind of seizing the above claim for the price of goods held by shopping, and due to this, G was unable to pay the price of goods according to the promise.

Therefore, there was a criminal intent of deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged, or of deceiving the defendant at the time.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (2 million won) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant, even if he/she borrowed a credit card from the injured party, did not have the intent or ability to repay the amount used, he/she would have to use the credit card only for one week and repay the amount used within the period, if he/she borrowed the credit card from the Singu-dong around December 21, 201.

In short, it received a new card from the victim's wife D from the victim, and used the total amount of KRW 2,470,142 from the same day to the 24th day of the same month, and did not pay the card amount, thereby acquiring property profits equivalent to the same amount.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the grounds of the Defendant’s partial statement in the lower court, the victim, testimony at the lower court, and the description of the loan certificate on the following grounds.

1) The defendant suffered damage.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2016.05.23 2015고단730

-광주지방법원 장흥지원 2017.04.27 2017고단17

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.01.06 2016고단1442

-대구지방법원 안동지원 2016.01.19 2015고단321

-대전지방법원 2018.02.01 2017고단2798