(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.09 2018노524

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.09 2018노524

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) With respect to the crime set forth in subparagraphs 1 and 2 of the crime sight table (hereinafter “crime inundation table”) of the instant facts charged, the Defendant purchased the victim C with the Iel (hereinafter “victim”) operated from April 201 to May 2013.

There is no fraudulent fact.

2) With respect to the crime Nos. 5 per annum of the crime sight table, the Defendant is expected to complete the purchase and sale of the land owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant refusal land”) to the victim.

There is no fact that the notice was given.

3) As to the crimes set forth in 9 to 11 on a year-based list of crimes, criminal fraud cannot be established since the defendant satisfied the obligation to the victim as agreed by the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Before making a decision on the grounds of the above appeal ex officio, the Prosecutor received a total of KRW 106,00,000,000 from the 11st instance of the facts charged at the trial.

“The portion” was changed to “the total amount of KRW 94,00,000 in total nine times,” and the facts charged in the crime was withdrawn from No. 9 through No. 11 per annum, and the total amount “106,00,000 won” was changed to “94,00,000 won,” and this court granted permission, thereby changing to the subject of the judgment (the crime No. 9 through No. 12 per annum is recognized as the unity and continuity of the criminal, and thus, it is a comprehensive crime). The judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts related to the crime No. 9 through 11 on the list of crimes is no longer necessary, but the defendant's remaining assertion of misunderstanding the remaining facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this will be examined below.

3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

(a)in committing the crimes Nos. 1 and 2 a year of crime sight.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.09.22 2017노2028

-수원지방법원 2018.05.17 2017노9678

-대전지방법원 2016.03.25 2015노3631

-광주고등법원 (전주) 2018.10.05 2018노64

-서울남부지방법원 2018.08.17 2018노520