beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The defendant shall pay 142,00,000 won to the applicant for compensation by deceit.
3.2
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Fact-finding (1) The Defendant concluded a sale and purchase contract for the land located in PY 2 in the PY site between the victims and the aforementioned victims, and received the money stated in the facts charged of the instant case as part of the payment. In the case of the full payment of the down payment received from the said victims, the Defendant attempted to make a loan and to have the transfer registered, but the victims paid only part of the down payment of KRW 1.25 million, and failed to implement the original plan due to the decrease in the ratio of the real estate mortgage loan in New Zealand’s real estate crisis that occurred around 2008 due to the financial crisis that occurred in New Zealand, and there was no fact that the said victims made a statement to the same effect as the facts charged of the instant case.
Therefore, the defendant did not intend to deceive the victims or to acquire the sales price of the case from the victims.
(2) The money received from the victim Q from the victim Q was sold to Q, which is the Defendant’s possession, to Q, and received as the down payment, not the money to be received as the deposit for the lease deposit, but to be returned in the future.
B. The sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. (1) When considering the difference between the method of evaluating the credibility of the first instance court and the appellate court in accordance with the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the principle of court-oriented trial, the existence of credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court may be determined in light of the contents of the judgment of the first instance court and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, or considering special circumstances to deem that the first instance court clearly erred in the determination of the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court, or the results of further examination of evidence conducted between the results of the examination in the first instance