logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.16 2016노480
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. A summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) has not filed two copies of the instant mobile phone, or received two copies of the said mobile phone.

2. Determination

A. On August 14, 2013, the Defendant wishes to open two cell phoness to the victim E using his mobile phone (C) at the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Seongbukdong, Seoul, to contact the victim E with “F” operated by the victim E in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul.

After resolving the unpaid charges, two mobile phone openings are scheduled to be followed, and two mobile phone openings are sent first.

B. If a person fails to settle the unpaid fee, he/she would return the mobile phone.

However, even if the defendant is delivered two mobile phones, he did not have the intention or ability to normally proceed with the opening of the mobile phone, and even if he did not pay the unpaid charge, he did not have any intention to return the mobile phone to the victim.

On August 21, 2013, the Defendant was issued two mobile phones A 870S mobile phone numbers from the victim, i.e., the total market price of KRW 1,658,80,00.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

B. (1) First of all, whether the Defendant applied for two copies of a mobile phone in F, whether the Defendant applied for two copies of a mobile phone on the part of F.

There are statements in E, I in the court of original trial, new service contract (Evidence No. 2), and inquiries about telephone contents.

In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the first instance court, there is a substantial unfair circumstance to believe that the statement in the E’s court room is in accord with this, and there is considerable reason to believe that it is a statement in the E’s court room.

In addition, there are two mobile phones in F as stated in the facts charged by the defendant only with other remaining evidence.

arrow