beta
Text
Defendant
A All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts1) The document submitted by Defendant A after the lapse of the period for filing a statement of grounds of appeal by Defendant A is deemed to be within the scope of supplement in case of lawful grounds of appeal. Defendant A omitted the indication of “Defendant” for other co-defendants who are not the Defendant at issue in the pertinent grounds of appeal by not more than B and C. The indication of “Defendants” is omitted in the name of the company not more than G G, and the indication of “Co-Defendants” is omitted in the name of the company not more than G. Upon the execution
2) At the end of the full examination of the business feasibility of the victim company, G merely delivers the data related to the business to the victim company by making a loan to it, and after which the victim company also examines the business feasibility, G is a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement (hereinafter “notarial deed
(2) If Defendant A and the victim company B and C are able to raise funds of KRW 500 million in the victim company, or even if it does not so, G is believed to be able to repay KRW 500 million in accordance with the instant notarial deed. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby convicted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged. 2) The Prosecutor (Defendant B and C) transferred the funds of KRW 550 million in the victim’s belief that the victim would provide the “safety device” to Defendant B and C, and the safety device was provided in the form of the instant notarial deed prepared by Defendant B and C.
In light of this, Defendant B and C should be deemed to have participated in the core part of the total fraud crime in collusion with A.
Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant B and C not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is no evidence to deem that Defendant B and C conspired with A.
B. Defendant A’s judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is against Defendant A.