beta
Text
[Defendant A] The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant and the judgment of the court of second instance are reversed.
Defendant .
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As seen below, Defendant A (1) - 6, 9, 11, 12, 14, 24 through 27, 37, 40, 41 through 43, 49, 55, 68, 75 through 92, 96, 97, 100, 10, and 102, Defendant A was guilty on the charge of taking the above money and valuables against Defendant A due to the receipt of each of the money and valuables, although there was no fact of receiving each of the money and valuables as stated in the judgment of the court below, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
1) According to the statements of Defendant D and AH and evidence submitted by their defense counsel, etc., the amount listed in No. 1 of the crime sight table (Ⅰ) as indicated in the judgment of the court below as indicated in the judgment of the court below, this part of the money is a stock company U (hereinafter referred to as “U”) with Defendant C as the remitter A without Defendant’s permission on May 10, 2010.
A) It is only remitted to Defendant A, and there was no fact that Defendant A received this part of the money from Defendant C or invested in U.S.; Defendant A’s corporate bank account in the name of Defendant A was transferred to the said corporate bank account on August 12, 2010 and returned this part of the money by U on August 12, 2010, it was returned by Defendant A and Defendant C. 2 was returned. 2) The amount of each part of the money listed in No. 2 through No. 6 of the List of Crimes (Ⅰ) in the judgment of the court below as indicated in the first instance, each of which was 50 million won invested by Defendant A in Q Q under the name of Defendant A, the wife on April 30, 2010, and is not the money received from illegal solicitation.
3) The amount set forth in No. 9, among the amounts set forth in No. 9, 11, and 12 as stated in the judgment of the court below in the first instance judgment, is the amount borrowed from Defendant C in purchasing the land set forth in No. 1, Q Q, the wife of Defendant A, from Defendant C, and is to be repaid to Defendant C. Thus, the amount received by Defendant A is the amount equivalent to the interest that is not KRW 350,000,000,000,000 won of the borrowed principal.