In case of deceiving a court by deceiving a third party who is a lineal blood relative, or exempting him from punishment pursuant to Article 328 (1) of the Criminal Act;

In case where a court deceivings a third party to take money through deception, the court, the defrauded, cannot be the victim, and the third party who has acquired money by deception is the victim, so in case where the third party who is the victim and the person who commits fraud are in a relationship of lineal blood relative, the court shall exempt the offender from punishment by applying mutatis mutandis Article 328(1) of the Criminal Act.

Defendant 1 and one other

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 74No5617 delivered on November 15, 1974

The appeal is dismissed.

(1) We examine the Prosecutor’s ground of appeal against Defendant 2.

This paper argues that there is a mistake of facts in the original judgment by violating the rules of evidence, and therefore, the determination of the evidence belongs to the exclusive jurisdiction of the fact-finding judge, and even considering the record, it cannot be recognized that there is an illegality in the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence in the original judgment, and the argument eventually leads to the argument of misunderstanding of facts, and therefore, it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal in this case.

(2) We examine the grounds of appeal against Defendant 1 of the public prosecutor. The legal interest in fraud is a property right. Therefore, in fraud, a person with property right or a victim cannot be the victim in fraud. Therefore, in the case of deceiving a court and deceiving a third party by deceiving a third party, the court, which is the defrauded, cannot be the victim, and in the case of deceiving a third party by defrauding a property, the court, which is the defrauded, shall not be the victim, and in the case of a third party who commits fraud, if there is a relationship between a third party who is the victim and a person who commits fraud, the punishment shall be exempted in accordance with Article 328(1) of the Criminal Act which applies mutatis mutandis to the crime. In the above purport, the court below's decision that maintained the first instance court's judgment that sentenced exemption from punishment against Defendant 1 as to the fraud is just

(3) Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Young-hee (Presiding Justice)