beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A may be granted Defendant A the right to operate a cafeteria within the premises of the N, middle and high school through the GU, the former president of the educational foundation RD Institute (hereinafter “RD Institute”).
It was deceiving, and it was suggested that Defendant A made an investment in the operation of the cafeteria to the victim F.
Therefore, since there was a property disposal act between the victim F and the defendant A due to the deception by the defendant B, the defendant A can only be the victim of the crime of fraud, and the fraudulent act was committed with the intent to acquire the victim F.
shall not be deemed to exist.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
B. Defendant B (1) The Defendant believed that the deceased U, the former president of the RD Institute, was entitled to entrust the operation of a restaurant within N and high school, and demanded the Defendant and M to make an investment in accordance with his/her direction. As such, the Defendant committed fraud or deception with the victim M and A.
It is difficult to see it.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to Defendant A’s assertion, the judgment of the court below which found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged in this case is justifiable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, Defendant A’s above assertion is without merit.
① Defendant B, during August 2013, 201, to Defendant A and his/her spouse, his/her spouse, Defendant B, through GU, who is the former president of the Korea R&D Institute.