(영문) 수원지방법원 2013.05.02 2012노4935 | 리걸엔진

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) 수원지방법원 2013.05.02 2012노4935

사기등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Despite the fact that the defendant conspireds with C to commit the crime of this case, the court below convicted all of the facts charged of this case. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the overall sentencing conditions of the instant case, the lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the Prosecutor added the following facts: “On the other hand, the Defendant, from August 29, 201 through August 30, 201 to August 30, 201, translated the method of cash withdrawal and the Korean language necessary to withdraw cash into the account deposited by the damaged source of money in the Korean language during the period from August 29, 201 to August 30, 201,” and Article 1-A of the facts charged.

In the 12th and 13th session, the Defendant, who was notified of the fact that the damaged source was deposited from the interim management book with which the name of the Defendant is unknown, filed an application for amendments to the Bill of Amendment with the purport that “The Defendant and C shall contact C, and shall be notified of the fact that the damaged source was deposited from the interim management book with which the name of the Defendant and C is unknown,” and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer because the subject was changed by permission

However, even if there are such reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. In the determination of the assertion of mistake of facts, the public offering does not require any legal punishment, but is only a combination of the intent of two or more persons to realize a crime through the joint processing, and the combination of opinions is made by several persons in order or impliedly.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2015.08.28 2015노1664

-서울서부지방법원 2015.07.16 2015노601

-대전지방법원 2012.10.25 2012고단1410

-수원지방법원 2019.08.29 2019노1748

-대구지방법원 2014.03.27 2014노367