beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. The summary of the facts charged of this case is that the Defendant had previously invested the money received as investment money from the victim in stocks, options, etc. before reporting losses, and some of the investment money received from the victim was thought to be used for personal purposes, such as living expenses, etc., and even though there was no particular property or income at the time, there was no intent or ability to pay the principal and profit to the victim. However, on April 2009, the victim made an investment to the victim in early 200 million, “I would like to make a considerable amount of money as an investment specialist and to make an investment to the surrounding people, and I would like to make an investment. In addition, if an investment of KRW 20 million is made, I would guarantee the principal and pay KRW 10 million every month, and he received additional money from the victim for the investment purpose of KRW 530,200,000 from around September 28, 2010.
2.(a)
The judgment below
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, taking into account the circumstances stated in the judgment below, by deceiving the victim as stated in the above facts charged.
The judgment of conviction in the first instance is reversed on the ground that it is difficult to readily conclude that the victim had paid money to the defendant by deceiving the defendant, and the defendant was acquitted on the charges above.
B. However, it is difficult to accept the above determination by the court below for the following reasons.
The following circumstances revealed by the record, i.e., (i) the Defendant had already suffered an investment from the victim, i.e., KRW 280,000,000,000 invested by the victim prior to such investment, and still had not been able to make a clear profit through options transactions even at the time of soliciting additional investment as described in the facts charged, and (ii) the Defendant suffered a principal loss to the victim.