logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.03.30 2015노6839
컴퓨터등사용사기
Text

The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant E shall be reversed.

Defendant

E shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five months.

Defendant

A, B, C, and.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant E (1) The misunderstanding of the facts did not have any awareness of the crime of fraud committed by those who were not the full name of the offender, and there was no intention of the principal offender for the crime of fraud.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence of the remaining Defendants (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (hereinafter “Defendant A and B”): 10 months of imprisonment; 6 months of imprisonment; 8 months of imprisonment and 100,000 won of fine”) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to Defendant E’s assertion of fact, an act of assistance under the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of mistake refers to direct and indirect acts that facilitate the commission of a principal offender while knowing the fact that the principal offender is committing a crime, so the principal offender has the intention of aiding and abetting the principal offender and that the principal offender’s act constitutes an act that constitutes an element of organization. However, inasmuch as such intention is in depth, if the principal offender denies it, it is bound to prove indirect facts that have considerable relevance to the principal offender in light of the nature of the object. In this context, there is no other way to reasonably determine the connection of the fact by using the degree of strict observation or analysis based on normal empirical rule. Moreover, the principal offender’s intention in aiding and abetting is not required to reasonably recognize the details of the crime realized by the principal offender, and it is sufficient for the principal offender to have dolusent recognition or predictability (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6056, Apr. 29, 2005).

In addition, it will be the same.

arrow