logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2013.05.10 2013노579
사기방조등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the various sentencing conditions of Defendant 2, the lower court’s imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment) against Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including the prosecutor’s (i.e., mistake of facts) that the Defendant himself/herself transferred the deposit passbook in an illegal place; however, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the Defendant’s statement in K and J, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant aids and abets the commission of fraud by transferring the passbook, etc. even though he/she is aware of the principal offender’s Bosing fraud.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (i) The prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts (i) although the defendant was aware that when transferring the passbook, password, cash card, etc. to D (one President) was to be used for the crime of Bophishing, the defendant of this part of the facts charged makes a false statement to the effect that, on May 10, 2012, a member of the organization in charge of Bophishing crime, to which the above D belongs, was called to the victim’s bank account (N) and received 100,000 won from the above victim to the company bank (N) from February 10, 2012, he/she received 10,000 won from M to the victim’s bank account (N).

7. From the date of the judgment of the court below until the date of 29.2, a member of the organization of the crime of Bosing the above Bosing 1,210 times by deceiving the victims over 1,210 times, and aiding and abetting the defraudation of KRW 410,80,790 by depositing it into the account transferred by the defendant.

The lower court’s judgment held that the Defendant was first of all, according to the record, on December 2012.

arrow