(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.07.01 2016노876 | 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) 인천지방법원 2016.07.01 2016노876

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the court below found the defendant guilty of the charge of this case by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles as to fraud, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case and the summary of the judgment of the lower court are as follows: “The Defendant, as the representative director of the Company E, has been performing construction work by process under a contract from the owner of the headquarters or chain store, while the head office and each owner of the building were unable to pay the construction cost due to lack of cash due to the failure of paying the construction cost due to the lack of cash payment, the Defendant, as the head office or owner of the building, made a false statement to the effect that “the Defendant would pay all the outstanding amounts before the end of the year” to the victim G who is performing construction work on June 2012, 200, which did not pay KRW 4,00,000 from April 2, 2012 to March 2013, the Defendant acquired the total amount of the KRW 18 to 28,50,000 from the victims’ profits by acquiring the total amount of the construction work from the Fund after I’s KRW 4,000,00 from March 28.

"............ the court below found the defendant guilty by taking account of the evidence at that time.

3. Determination on whether a deliberation was made

A. The establishment of a crime of fraud by acquiring pecuniary benefits equivalent to the construction cost should be determined at the time of the contract, and the payment of the construction cost cannot be made due to changes in economic conditions after the contract is concluded.

This is a simple non-performance of civil liability.

유사 판례

-대법원 2016.02.18 2015도14187

-수원지방법원 2017.08.09 2017고단1370

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2015.02.05 2014고단1312

-수원지방법원 2017.11.23 2016고단8389

-대법원 2016.2.18.선고 2015도14187 판결