beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, even if the defendant deceivings the victim about the intent and ability to repay as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, and such deceivings the victim, and it is recognized that the victim took over the total of KRW 225,00,000 from April 9, 2009 to June 20, 2014, the defendant had been sufficiently proven to the extent that he had the intent to defraud the victim by deceiving the victim about the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money at the time of the above borrowing, it is sufficiently proven that he had the intent
It is difficult to see
In light of the above, the judgment of the court below acquitted the defendant.
Judgment
In full view of the facts and circumstances established by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendant was sufficiently proven to the extent that it was sufficiently proven that the Defendant had the intent to acquire money by deceiving the victim by making a false statement even though the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money at the time of borrowing money from the injured party, such as the instant facts charged.
It is difficult to see
On the other hand, the defendant was acquitted.
In addition, in light of the fact that the criminal appellate court has the nature of a post-examination while the criminal trial court has the nature of a post-examination and the spirit of substantial direct deliberation as provided in the Criminal Procedure Act, there is insufficient evidence to exclude a reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of evidence such as examination of witness by the first instance court.
In a case where a not-guilty verdict is rendered on the facts charged, if it does not reach the extent that it can sufficiently resolve the reasonable doubt raised by the first instance trial even if the probability or doubt about some opposing facts may be raised as a result of the appellate trial’s examination, there is an error of mistake in the determination of facts in the first instance judgment, which lacks proof of crime solely
The facts charged are affirmed and convicted.