(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.12.13 2017노3461 | 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) 광주지방법원 2017.12.13 2017노3461

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (A) recognized by the lower court ex officio as the de facto victim of the instant public prosecution by modifying G to D without changing the indictment. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the changes in indictment, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment (hereinafter “instant assertion”). (b) At the time of the instant case, the Defendant did not deceive G and D due to the lack of criminal intent to commit fraud, and even if the Defendant’s deception was recognized, there was no relation between the Defendant’s deception and the delivery of money.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on fraud, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment (hereinafter “second assertion”). (2) In so doing, the lower court’s punishment (two years of imprisonment) inappropriate for sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The following circumstances revealed by the prosecutor (1) misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding of the legal principles, namely, ① even if the Defendant did not complete the development of the instant invention and received money in the name of the transfer price for the invention, even if he did not have any intent or ability to give the said invention a large amount of human resources capable of changing the human history and causing a large amount of money, the Defendant may impose money by transferring the technology of the State and the company to a large amount of money.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the other party deceivings KRW 300 million to “to transfer the invention of this case” is G; and (b) the amount acquired by the Defendant is KRW 200 million as a bribe to G and the owner of the said KRW 200 million as a bribe is G, it is reasonable to deem that the victim of the crime of this case is G.

Nevertheless, the court below determined the victim of the crime of this case as D, and the judgment of the court below is erroneous.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2017.08.31 2017고단227

-울산지방법원 2016.01.08 2015노1174

-광주지방법원 2017.08.30 2017노2589

-광주지방법원 2017.08.09 2017노1376

-광주지방법원 2018.01.17 2017노3854