beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts did not receive money by deceiving the victim He as stated in the judgment of the court below. (2) The sentence of the court below against Defendant A of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. In light of the fact that the defendants used the borrowed money to establish another hospital that is unrelated to the establishment of the U hospital or the establishment of a corporation, etc. on or around April 3, 2006, the prosecutor 1 acknowledged the fact by evidence that the defendants conspired in collusion with the victim H on or around April 3, 2006 and acquired 300 million won by deceiving the victim H by deceiving the victim H, and in addition, the defendant A recognized the fact that the victim H could be ordered to receive human park construction from the LIG group on or after the fact that the defendant acquired 10 million won by deceiving the victim H for registration expenses. However, the judgment of the court below acquitted each of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to unjust sentencing. 2) The court below erred in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the defendant A.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts on January 26, 2006, the lower court duly adopted and investigated the following circumstances, i.e., (i) around January 2006, the Defendant A borrowed KRW 100 million from the victim H to talking about the Defendant B, N, P, and hospital businesses. Defendant A borrowed KRW 100 million from the victim H as of January 25, 2006, and Defendant A borrowed KRW 100 million from the victim H to repay KRW 50 million on August 30, 206, and KRW 50 million on March 30, 2007; (ii) at the time, the Defendant A did not have any asset or fixed monthly income in its name; (iii) at the time of borrowing from the victim H to the Defendant’s personal use of KRW 50 million; and (iv) at the time of borrowing the same.