(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.10.26 2017노1730 | 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) 대전지방법원 2017.10.26 2017노1730

사기등

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In relation to the facts charged in the case No. 4604 of the lower judgment, Defendant 1 did not deceive the victim and did not intend to defraud the victim in the following respect.

However, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

In the case of KRW 15,00,000,000 per annum No. 1 of the list of crimes attached to the crime committed by the Commission, the Defendant received money from the injured party, but returned the money to the injured party on that day.

The amount of KRW 5 million a year of 2,000,000 deposited to the account under the name of the victim. At the time, the Defendant did not hold and manage the passbook of the above account, which is not the amount received by the Defendant.

The defendant does not receive the same money from the injured party in the case of the amount of 35 million won per annum No. 35 million won per annum.

㉣ 연번 4번의 3,000만 원의 경우, 피고인은 피해 자로부터 3,000만 원이 아니라 2,000만 원을 받았다.

This includes 50 million won per annum 50,600,000 won, which was first the defendant received from the injured party to receive the successful bid in the name of the injured party, and the above 20 million won with the consent of the injured party was not awarded the successful bid, the additional loan was made to the defendant friendly AA.

2. (3) As seen in the paragraphs of the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea, the Defendant had the victim lent KRW 30 million to AA on December 7, 2015, and the said KRW 30 million is a separate amount that is not included in the facts charged of this case.

The Defendant received only KRW 30 million, and the Defendant received only “20 million.”

The court below asserted that only KRW 65 million was damaged by the victim, including the amount related to No. 4 per annum 5,60,000,000 per annum 6,000,000,000,000 per annum 6,000

argument is asserted.

was made.

In the case of KRW 15 million per annum, the defendant received the same money from the injured party, but the injured party is a person who damages the house leased by the defendant.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2016.06.02 2015고정312

-대전지방법원 2016.05.12 2015노3344

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.08.10 2018고단377

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2017.10.11 2017고단511

-서울서부지방법원 2016.01.21 2015노1774