logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.07.26 2018노324
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was the owner of J-J Forest land 96,652 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”).

On May 20, 2014, when the defendant borrowed KRW 23 million from the injured party, he/she thought that the person who would purchase the forest of this case at the time of May 20, 2014, can receive the purchase price from the injured party and reimburse the victim with KRW 23 million until May 23, 2014.

However, since the buyer failed to prepare money, the sales contract for the forest of this case was no longer made, and rather, the auction for the forest of this case was commenced, and only the victim was unable to repay the borrowed money.

Therefore, it is not possible to recognize the criminal intent of defraudation by the accused.

B. The lower court’s sentence (an amount of KRW 5 million) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. In a civil monetary lending relationship with regard to the assertion of mistake of facts, the criminal intent of defraudation of the borrowed money can not be acknowledged, but if the defendant borrowed money as if he were to repay the money in spite of the absence of a certain intention of change or the absence of the ability to repay within the due date as promised at the time of the loan (see Supreme Court Decision 83Do1048, Aug. 23, 1983). In addition, unless the defendant does not confession, the criminal intent of deception, which is a subjective element of fraud, shall be determined by taking into account such objective circumstances as the defendant's financial history before and after the crime, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing the transaction, which is not a conclusive intention, is sufficient for the criminal intent, not a conclusive intention, and in light of the above legal principles, the defendant lawfully borrowed money to the victim by the evidence of this case and the following circumstances recognized by the court below until the due date of repayment shall be met.

arrow