logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2013.08.21 2013노1198
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the facts charged 1), the Defendant did not borrow money in order to prevent the check of the number of shares, and at the time, the Defendant had the intent to repay and sufficient means to repay, so the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was guilty, although the Defendant did not deceiving the victim. (2) In the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant received money from G rather than borrowing money from the victim.

B. Even if the Defendant’s conviction of unreasonable sentencing is acknowledged, the Defendant paid a much more amount than the borrowed amount from the victim. The Defendant’s imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by each evidence duly adopted and investigated by the first instance court and the trial court of the first instance on the assertion of mistake of facts: ① the victim has consistently lent the name of the loan to the defendant "in order to prevent the check of the number of shares"; ② the defendant has the obligation of KRW 400 million to the victim at the time, ② the defendant had the obligation of KRW 400 million to the victim, and the defendant's statement that the defendant lent the money to prevent the default of payment because there is no other security than the check of the number of shares; ③ the defendant has the obligation of KRW 400 million to the victim at the time of borrowing the money; ③ the fact that the defendant's obligation to the victim was about KRW 400 million at the time of borrowing the above money; ④ the fact that the payment of the money was actually defaulted in March 2005, ⑤ the defendant has not lent the bill to the I, and ⑤ the bill has not been repaid.

arrow