(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.11.16 2016노236 | 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) 창원지방법원 2016.11.16 2016노236

사기등

Text

1. The guilty part of the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant A and the part against Defendant A of the judgment of the court of second instance.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of the judgment of the court of first instance (eight years of imprisonment) and that of the judgment of the court of second instance (eight months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

B. As to the part on Defendant B in the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the part on the part on Defendant B, the court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that Defendant B conspired with Defendant A, but acquitted Defendant A on this part on the charge. 2) As to the part on the innocence of Defendant A and the part on Defendant C in the judgment of first instance concerning Defendant A and the part on Defendant C, the court below acquitted Defendant A on this part. The court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that Defendant A was not guilty on this part.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal ex officio (as to Defendant A), the guilty part of the judgment of the first instance and the judgment of the second instance against Defendant A were sentenced to each of the judgment of the second instance, and both the Defendant A filed an appeal against all of the above two appeals cases. The court decided to hold concurrent hearings. The conviction part of the judgment of the first instance against Defendant A and each of the judgment of the second instance are concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the conviction part of the judgment of the first instance and the judgment of the second instance cannot be maintained in entirety.

Defendant

Despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal against A, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. In full view of the facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake, the Defendant B has credibility to acknowledge that the Defendant A was in a competitive relationship with the Defendant.

참조조문

-형법 제38조 제1항

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.16 2015노1538

-대구고등법원 2015.07.23 2014노697

-서울남부지방법원 2020.11.17 2020노1271

-인천지방법원 2021.03.19 2020노678

-의정부지방법원 2019.11.21 2019노231