logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.01.22 2014노1314
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

Although the victim’s statement was prepared with a false and false fact-finding certificate (as of March 9, 2013) beyond the victim’s meeting, the lower court convicted the Defendant by misunderstanding the fact that the victim believed such false evidence.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts, since the defendant committed each fraud as stated in the facts charged in this case, the court below's decision of conviction is just and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the defendant and the defense counsel.

(1) A victim’s statement is consistent, detailed and there are no circumstances to suspect the credibility thereof.

On the other hand, it is difficult to believe that the contents of the defendant's lawsuit are not consistent and are not consistent with the current situation or objective facts recognized.

② A witness D makes a statement differently to an investigative agency that the said fact-finding confirmations prepared by himself/herself that conform to the facts charged in the instant case (the co-principal part) have been falsely prepared by the meeting of the victim.

However, while the main contents of the above confirmation document conforms to the facts objectively confirmed, the contents of D’s statement on D’s motive for the victim to gather the defendant or the price that D received from the victim in return for gathering the defendant, are not easily understandable in light of the empirical rule.

For this reason, the contents of the above confirmation document are not false.

B. Unreasonable sentencing.

arrow