(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.09.01 2016노2139 | 리걸엔진

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) 부산지방법원 2016.09.01 2016노2139

업무상배임등

Text

The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

Reasons

The summary of the grounds for appeal (the defendants A), B, and C, which the court below sentenced to the defendants (six years of imprisonment, one year of imprisonment, one year of imprisonment, and eight months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

Defendant

D misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is not involved in the crime of defraudation by Defendant A, but merely aiding and abetting the crime of fraud by lending the name in the name of Defendant A to obtain the loan of a pre-tax loan.

The sentence imposed by the court below on Defendant D (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Defendant

A Defendant A engaged in the business of concluding a real estate lease agreement from August 2009 to December 2013, while engaging in the brokerage assistant of a licensed real estate agent, etc., Defendant A committed several offenses, such as occupational breach of trust, fabrication of private documents, uttering of an investigation document, fraud, violation of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act, embezzlement, and violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, and the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name. The total amount of damages caused by the fraud is KRW 650 million (the total amount of damages exceeds KRW 530 million, even if the amount of damages caused by the fraud overlaps with the lessee is excluded), occupational breach of trust, and embezzlement is up to KRW 260 million. The amount of damages caused by the embezzlement is very significant in light of the period of the crime and the amount of damages caused by the embezzlement. Defendant A was punished three times by a fine, and Defendant A committed some of the crimes was punished by most of the victims, and Defendant A did not have reached a new agreement between the victims and the victims.

However, Defendant A led to the confession of each of the crimes in this case.

참조조문

-부동산 실권리자명의 등기에 관한 법률

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2014.11.27 2014노217

-부산지방법원 2016.12.16 2016노2527

-전주지방법원 2015.10.16 2015노858

-부산지방법원 2016.01.21 2015노2875

-부산지방법원 2019.05.31 2018노4413