logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2018.02.13 2017도2019
컴퓨터등사용사기
Text

The judgment below

Among them, it is the fraud of using computers, etc. due to the increase in additional interest rates for each actual interlocking loans to the Defendants.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the appeal as to the fraud by using computers, etc. due to the increase of existing loan interest rates by each individual change interest rate, the lower court is justifiable to have maintained the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendants on the ground that there was no proof of crime as to the fraud by using computers, etc. due to the increase of existing loan interest rates among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In doing so, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending relevant legal principles.

2. As to the grounds of appeal on the fraudulent part of the computer, etc. used due to the increase in additional interest rates for each actual interlocking loan

A. The summary of the facts charged against the Defendants is as follows.

Since the end of 2007, the Bank of Korea's standard interest rate has continuously increased, and there has been a demand for deposit for lending funds to X land compensation props, and since the end of 2007, the market interest rate has increased due to existing loans has deteriorated due to the special market competition in commercial banks. Defendant A, Defendant B, Defendant C, and Defendant E were willing to raise the additional interest rate for actual interlocking loans as well as the additional interest rate for actual interlocking loans. Defendant A, Defendant B, Defendant C, and Defendant E was willing to raise the additional interest rate for actual interlocking loans. Defendant B, Defendant B, Defendant B, and Defendant B, Defendant B, and Defendant B, Defendant B, and Defendant B, Defendant B, 108, instructed each of them to implement the additional interest rate on loans by explaining the need for additional interest rate increase against the heads of branch offices "the X district land compensation countermeasures in 2008" in the G Cooperatives on December 31, 2007.

arrow