(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.05.20 2015노3378

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) 의정부지방법원 2016.05.20 2015노3378

사기

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the statement by the victim of the summary of the grounds for appeal and the materials related to the Defendant’s self-sufficiency at the time, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant had committed the crime of

However, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant: (a) around February 1, 2008, in a case where the Defendant borrowed the money to the victim C, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the money; (b) however, he did not have the intent or ability to pay the money to the victim C; (c) the Defendant was a doctor’s house, and (d) he was able to do so.

The loan of KRW 10 million shall be repaid within three days on the face of the loan.

1. As seen, the Plaintiff made a false statement to the effect that the Plaintiff was “.”

The Defendant received from the injured party the delivery of KRW 10,000,000 from the telebank.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

3. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. In full view of the following facts recognized by the record, the lower court’s judgment: (a) based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, which alone led the Defendant to deception or deception the Defendant at the time of such deception;

It is insufficient to view it, and on the grounds that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, not guilty by the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

1) The victim did not directly call that he himself “the above four houses were the house of doctor, and the internal consciousness is well living.” The victim was merely a speech made by other people at the place where a fraternity meeting is held, such as the Defendant.

2) The victim: (a) at the place where the Defendant was a fraternity meeting, the victim: (b) lent KRW 10 million to 30,000,000 to her for 10 days; and (c) lost the time-to-face payments; and (d) paid money to her in another place.”

section 3.

3) The Defendant is the victim.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2015.11.27 2015고정927

-수원지방법원 2014.06.13 2014노1556

-의정부지방법원 2018.06.20 2017고정2629

-부산지방법원 2013.01.18 2012노3182

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.06.07 2017고단187