logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.22 2013노821
사기
Text

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance regarding "crimes under paragraph (1)" shall be reversed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles with respect to the judgment of the court of first instance: the defendant concluded a contract with C (hereinafter referred to as C) for remodeling of the "VH shop" and for the exclusive supply of new chain stores, and concluded a contract for the repair of the "VH shop" and received construction performance guarantee, etc. from the victims; the defendant who exclusively received construction performance guarantee, etc. from C at the time, was prepared in advance by several subcontractors in order to prepare for this anticipated that the construction will be ordered by the chain store in the country of C, and it cannot be concluded that the chain store of C would be secured, and that it is not secured by the defendant's ability. Thus, the defendant did not belong to the victims and did not have any criminal intent to obtain fraud.

On the other hand, the defendant did not know about the fraud against the victim H and did not take part in it at all.

(2) Unreasonable sentencing

B. On the second instance judgment: Unfair sentencing (the appellate brief dated December 9, 2013, submitted by the counsel, stated the “fact-finding” assertion as to the fraud of the victim AH on the grounds of appeal. However, on the trial date that took place on January 10, 2014, both the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted only the “fact-finding” as the grounds for appeal, and there is no ground for ex officio reversal as to this part, and thus, no separate judgment as to the allegation of mistake is made).

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal prior to the determination of ex officio.

The court of the first instance decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal case against the judgment of the court below, and among the judgments of the court of the second instance and the judgment of the court of the second instance.

arrow