(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.15 2013노1003

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.15 2013노1003

사기

Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant: Error of mistake of facts (the amount the Defendant received from the victim E is referred to as “G” for convenience as stated in the loan agreement for share acceptance.

(B) The Defendant did not have any awareness that the money received from the victim will be used only for business because it had been paid the necessary expenses for personal funds at that time in the course of implementing the instant business. Since the Defendant participated in the business with the Defendant and understood this fact, the Defendant did not have any awareness of deceiving the victim as well as the Defendant at that time did not intend to commit the crime of defraudation) and unfair sentencing.

Prosecutor: 2. Judgment of the first instance court on the grounds of unfair sentencing

A. On March 2010, the summary of the facts charged in this case, the Defendant, at any restaurant located near the Seocho-gu Seoul East Eastern Station, invested the victim E a total of KRW 200 million in total by 100,000,000 in 20,000,000 in 20,000 won in each of the defective projects for the development of a computer-form interpretation program conducted by the Na and F, and the Na and F are necessary to operate the project, and the Defendant said that the amount of KRW 200,000 is 50,000,000 in the company’

However, even if the defendant received investment money from the victim at the time, he thought that he would use it for personal purposes, such as deposit money, etc., and did not intend to use it as business fund.

The Defendant, from March 20, 2010 to March 26, 2010, obtained a total of KRW 2220 million from the victim, and acquired it by fraud.

B. The judgment of the first instance court (1) The Defendant received KRW 200 million from the victim's 50% of the amount invested by the Defendant, and the Defendant stated that the loan agreement for the acquisition of shares was made in the meaning of an advance agreement on investment, thereby recognizing the fact that the amount received from the victim is an investment.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2014.02.13 2014고합2

-울산지방법원 2013.11.22 2012고합475

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2012.11.09 2012고단560

-수원지방법원 2019.11.27 2019고단5380

-서울서부지방법원 2020.04.17 2018가합33497