(영문) 의정부지방법원 2021.01.22 2020노2198

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) 의정부지방법원 2021.01.22 2020노2198

사기등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the Defendant (unfair sentencing) sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor 1, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, even if the Defendant recognized that the seized goods were moved to a non-permanent location as stated in this part of the facts charged, and thus, found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges.

2) The above sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination as to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged was that the Defendant owned the goods equivalent to KRW 16,250,00 in total market price of the goods (hereinafter “instant seizure”) at the company “C” (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) located in both weeks of his own operation, and the factory located in the above location, at the factory “instant factory” (hereinafter “instant factory”). The Defendant owned the goods of KRW 16,250,000 (hereinafter “instant seizure”).

On May 11, 2018, the enforcement officer T belonging to the Jung-gu District Court attached the said goods at the Defendant Company and attached a seizure mark on the said goods, based on the original copy of the seizure decision of UT movables in the above court upon delegation of the execution by the creditor E.

However, from May 11, 2018 to October 2018, the Defendant moved and concealed the above goods with a seizure mark affixed thereto from around October 2018.

B. The lower court rendered a judgment that acquitted of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge this part of the facts charged, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

(c)

1) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, it is as follows.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2016.07.14 2016고단1948

-수원지방법원 2016.04.05 2016고합35

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.03.30 2017고정52

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2016.04.15 2015고단1687

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2021.02.03 2019고단3373