beta
Text
All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);
A. The court below acknowledged the Defendants’ conspiracy of breach of trust, and found the Defendants A guilty of the charge of breach of trust. In full view of the Defendants’ mother process, the process of writing the sales contract of this case, and other facts stated by the court below, the Defendants’ intent of breach of trust is sufficiently recognized, and even if the act of breach of trust exceeds the permissible limit as a means of exercising the right by social norms, if the act of breach of trust constitutes an unlawful act and constitutes a crime of breach of trust, it constitutes a crime of breach of trust. In light of the above, the court below acquitted the Defendants of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the Defendants’ act of breach of trust constitutes a crime
B. The lower court’s decision which rejected the prosecutor’s application for changes in indictment as a litigation fraud is unlawful.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that Defendant A, on April 21, 2010, was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution to the Seoul Central District Court on April 21, 2010, on the grounds of the crime of forging private documents, etc. and was sentenced to 8 months of suspended execution on February 8, 2012, and Defendant B purchased the said Gara 102 (hereinafter “Gra 102”). Defendant B was the wife of the network H, who purchased the said Gara 102 (hereinafter “Gra 102”).
Defendant
A, around May 30, 1990, entered into a contract with ten divided owners of the above Flue Housing and entered into a new loan construction contract, and subsequently acquired the ownership of new loan around November 1994, which renounces the construction due to the shortage of construction funds. On the other hand, around September 20, 1998, to the I who supplied the material to this Construction, completed the construction for the purpose of securing claims, such as the cost of the material, to the I who would be completed the construction in the name of his respective JJ on September 20, 1992.