(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.06.01 2015노3326 | 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 2016.06.01 2015노3326

사기등

Text

All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the facts constituting the crime of paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below, Defendant A was believed to establish a construction company and to be able to implement the project with the consent of at least 70-80% of the land use through S and AY, and borrowed KRW 50 million from the victim I.

Therefore, Defendant A did not intend to acquire money from the victim because he/she thought that he/she has repaid the money borrowed from the victim I when the above business is in progress.

As the instant contract contract for construction work was placed only on the documents that I possessed, and Defendant A established J and possessed the corporate seal and took charge of all the work of J while maintaining the corporate seal, the forgery of the private document cannot be established.

With respect to the facts constituting the crime of paragraph (3) of the judgment below, Defendant A believed that it is possible to carry out the above relocation project after hearing the horses from Defendant B, “The fact that Defendant A had contacted with the president on the project for the relocation of the NF intentionally and has suspended the said project,” and borrowed KRW 200 million from the Victim P in order to promote the said project.

Defendant

A had no intention to obtain money from the victim P because he/she had been aware of the full payment of the money borrowed from the victim P upon the process of the project.

(B) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(2) Defendant B’s punishment (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected all of the above arguments on Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, on the ground that the Defendant alleged the same as the grounds for appeal of this case, and on the ground that “the judgment on Defendant A’s assertion” was stated in detail, the court below rejected all the above arguments.

(1) As to the assertion on the criminal facts No. 1 as indicated in the judgment below.

유사 판례

-대구고등법원 2013.01.31 2012노668

-의정부지방법원 2016.02.01 2015고단3412

-서울북부지방법원 2013.08.08 2013노717

-서울서부지방법원 2018.01.11 2017노261

-대전지방법원 2016.12.15 2016노1177