(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.05.12 2016노1262 | 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) 청주지방법원 2017.05.12 2016노1262

사기

Text

All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal - Fact misunderstanding or misunderstanding of legal principles

A. When comprehensively considering Defendant A, Defendant B, victim, and J’s statements with respect to Defendant B, Defendant B shall be deemed a joint principal offender for the instant crime.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted Defendant B on the ground that the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles as to joint principal offenders, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. As to Defendant A, the prosecutor stated that “A”, “the scope of appeal”, “the entire amount”, and “misunderstanding of facts and of legal principles” on the grounds of appeal in the column of “Defendant A” in the petition of appeal, it appears that Defendant A also filed an appeal.

However, in the statement of reasons for appeal, it was written on the ground of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, but it did not state specific reasons as to Defendant A, and thus, it cannot be viewed as legitimate reasons for appeal (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8117, Jan. 31, 2008). Therefore, the prosecutor’s appeal as to Defendant A has legitimate reasons for appeal.

It is difficult to see that the prosecutor has lodged an appeal against the defendant A with respect to the part of acquittal for the reason that recognized the single crime, not the common principal offender, even if the prosecutor has tried to do so with the defendant A, so long as the crime of fraud is not recognized with respect to the defendant B, the defendant A cannot be a joint principal offender with the defendant B, and thus, the defendant A cannot also be accepted). Therefore, with respect to the defendant A, the prosecutor's appeal against this part of the prosecutor's appeal should be dismissed by decision in accordance with Article 361-4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as long as the prosecutor declares a judgment after pleading with respect to the rest of the appeal,

2. Determination as to the fraud against Defendant B

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a fraud at the Cheongju District Court on December 11, 2015.

참조판례

-대법원 2008. 1. 31. 선고 2007도8117 판결

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.12.17 2018노5693

-서울고등법원 2018.06.07 2018노37

-부산지방법원 2018.05.04 2018노927

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.12 2016노28

-대전고등법원 2017.06.23 2017노144