(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.10.31 2018노2433 | 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) 광주지방법원 2018.10.31 2018노2433

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is true that the defendant misunderstanding of the facts received KRW 41.66 million from the injured party, but this is merely a provision as a expense for the training of underground funds that the injured party had been using at the time, and it does not have the fact of deceiving the injured party and deceiving the money as stated in the judgment of the court below, but the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The judgment of the court below

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, i.e., ① the victim is consistently in the investigative agency and the lower court court’s trial to provide the victim with a business plan at the location along with E around February 2, 2015, and the government proposed to receive subsidies from the government while presenting the victim’s business plan, and would have a factory for the production of cancer, and would pay money to the extent that the victim can receive government subsidies from the government, or would have received the cost of purchasing raw materials for cancer treatment, etc.

In full view of the following: (a) the Defendant, as stated in the lower judgment, stated that he provided KRW 4,166,00,000,000, which was trusted and delivered to the Defendant; (b) the business plan submitted by the victim that he received from the Defendant at the time, includes the Defendant’s own pen, etc. for the construction of a factory for the development of cancer treatment; and (c) there is no reliable evidence as to the construction of a cancer production plant as alleged by the Defendant, or the payment of government subsidies; and (b) the Defendant, as stated in

B. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing is concurrently determined in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to the crime of fraud for which the judgment became final and conclusive and the concurrent crimes of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

참조조문

-형법 제39조 제1항

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.07.20 2018고단74

-서울서부지방법원 2015.11.11 2014고단3450

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.20. 선고 2017고합349 판결

-의정부지방법원 2021.02.09 2019고단5722

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.11 2016고단5793