logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.08.10 2017고단1127
사기방조
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On August 5, 2016, the person whose summary of the facts charged was the name of the facts charged is to sell TV to the victim C, who posted a notice to the Korean bulletin board, stating that “TED TV is sold” and reported and contacted.

However, there was no intention or ability to sell TV to the victim.

By deceiving the victim as above, 210,000 won was remitted from the victim to the one bank account (E) in the name of the same day from the victim as the above, and the victim acquired the total of KRW 1,710,000 from the victims four times as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Form.

In order to assist the above person in committing the above fraud, the defendant provided one bank account under his own name (F) and one bank account under his husband's name (hereinafter above D) so that he could receive the remittance of the transferred money, and notified the person under whose name the transaction password and other information, so that he could transfer the transferred money to the mobile banking, and transferred the transferred money to G company bank account (H) and I (J).

Accordingly, the defendant, by facilitating the fraud of a person without a name, has prevented it.

2. Determination 1) Since the crime of aiding and abetting is committed with the knowledge that the principal offender is committing the crime, the intention of aiding and abetting the principal offender to establish the crime of aiding and abetting and the principal offender’s act constitutes the elements that constitute the crime of aiding and abetting and abetting shall be all of the principal offender’s act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do382, Apr. 8, 2003; 2015Do14858, Dec. 23, 2015). In the case of aiding and abetting, the principal offender’s intention is not required to recognize the specific contents of the crime realized by the principal offender, but it is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the specific contents of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do6056, Apr. 29, 2005; 2012Do2628, Jun. 28, 2012).

arrow