beta
Text
The judgment below
The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
The judgment below
Of them, compensation order.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In relation to the 2014 Highest 2584 case, the Defendant was only aware of the re-power of the drawer of the check and did not deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged.
B. The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.
2. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence, namely, ① the Defendant appears to have made a false statement to the effect that he/she was the president of the Seoul Veterans Association with respect to E, the issuer, upon requesting the victim C to discount the number of shares per unit (which was 26 pages of investigation records), ② the Defendant merely requested the discount of the number of shares per unit of this case.
Although there is a change to the purport that the Defendant believed or believed the horses of this case, it is difficult for the Defendant to believe such change in light of that the name of D was not well known even until the time when the investigation was conducted in this case, and (3) even if the Defendant’s statement was made, D used half of the face value of 100 million won at the request of the Defendant for the discount of the number of shares of this case, and the Defendant paid half of the face value of this case to the person who discounted the face value of this case. (4) The Defendant appears to have sufficiently known that, as long as he was engaged in credit business and received proposals such as paragraph (3) of this case, the number of shares of this case was not normal number of shares, and (5) The actual number of shares of this case was not paid following the date when the issuer was defaulted on April 23, 2013, which was before the Defendant requested a discount to the victim, but the Defendant was not able to pay the last amount of promissory note which was in arrears.