(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.08.22 2018노131 | 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) 광주지방법원 2018.08.22 2018노131

사기

Text

The judgment below

Part of the compensation order, except the compensation order, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

(b).

Reasons

1. The court below rejected the application for compensation order filed by the applicant for compensation.

According to Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, an applicant for compensation fails to file an appeal against a judgment dismissing the application for a compensation order. Therefore, the rejection part of the application for a compensation order was immediately finalized.

Therefore, the rejection of an application for compensation order among the judgment of the court below is excluded from the scope of this court.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was actually hospitalized according to the direction of the doctor in charge, and did not intend to obtain insurance money.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court held that the Defendant was hospitalized for a period exceeding the reasonable period on purpose, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court under the title of “determination of the defense counsel’s assertion” as to the same purport as the grounds for appeal by the Defendant.

The court rejected the argument and found the defendant guilty of all the facts charged in this case.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there was no evidence to prove that maintaining the first instance judgment is remarkably unfair. Thus, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

4. The fact that the sum of the amount acquired by deception and the total amount obtained by deception is larger, and the damage has not been recovered at all.

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 (창원) 2021.01.27 2020노181

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.18 2017노3739

-서울남부지방법원 2021.01.25 2020노1038

-서울고등법원 2021.02.02 2020노1692

-광주지방법원 2018.10.10 2018노2232