(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2019.01.10 2017노343

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) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2019.01.10 2017노343

사기미수등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (legal scenarios and mistake of facts) 1) The facts charged in the instant case are deemed as impeding the Defendant’s exercise of the right of defense by excessively comprehensively stating the date and time of the crime, and thus, constitutes invalid in violation of the provisions of law. 2) The lower court acknowledged that the Defendant forged a cash custody certificate in the name of the deceased D (hereinafter “the deceased”) and subsequently, filed a lawsuit against G and H, who is the deceased’s heir, claiming ownership transfer registration, and exercised that the Defendant attempted to acquire real estate worth KRW 250 million, but the lower court’s fact-finding was based solely on circumstances, instead of direct evidence.

The Defendant did not forge the above cash custody certificate, and the cash custody certificate was prepared according to the deceased’s will before the deceased’s birth (the Defendant lent KRW 40 million to the deceased, and the J lent KRW 33 million to the deceased, KRW 35 million, KRW 32 million, and KRW 100 million to the deceased. However, on June 22, 2012, the last date of the J’s loan, the Defendant prepared a cash custody certificate for KRW 140 million, and thereafter, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against G, etc. with the cash custody certificate that was kept in his custody. Accordingly, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The prosecutor (unfair punishment) of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service) is deemed to be too uneasy and unfair.

2. The part concerning the forgery of private document among the facts charged was made ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor, and the prosecutor's judgment on the grounds of appeal by the court below 3. A.

An application for amendment to a bill of amendment was filed with the same content as the "a summary of the facts charged in the instant case", and this court permitted the application and changed the subject matter of the judgment, and each of the offenses of the judgment below, including this part, must be sentenced to one sentence due to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of

유사 판례

-인천지방법원부천지원 2015.11.13 2015가합100159

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.03 2016나72893

-대구지방법원경주지원 2016.07.01 2015가단253

-전주지방법원 2017.12.22 2016가단29694

-청주지방법원 2019.02.01 2018고합75