logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2013.07.29 2013노827
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

An application for compensation by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that the defendant of mistake of facts received 60 million won from the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case, or this was not paid as the cost of computer purchase or installation, but as part of the cost of construction due to the test of the victim's opening (hereinafter referred to as "the PC bank of this case"), and it was not the defendant's intent or ability to install on the PC bank of this case by purchasing a computer.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant's fact can be sufficiently recognized by deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case in spite of no intent or ability to purchase or install the computer as agreed on the PC of this case, and by receiving 60 million won from the victim as the cost for the purchase or installation of the computer. Thus, the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. It is true that there are extenuating circumstances for the defendant to consider the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant paid seven million won out of the amount of damage to the victim and the defendant's wife in need of support and the child attending a middle school.

However, despite being fully convicted of the facts charged of this case, the defendant committed the crime of this case without breaking his mistake, and is consistent with the defense for the defendant, despite the existence of the same kind of criminal records, without properly breaking his mistake.

arrow