(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.10 2017노371

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.10 2017노371

사기등

Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

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

Seized evidence 1 through 11, 14, 15, 17.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding misunderstanding (the judgment of the court below No. 1) the Defendant did not receive a loan by exercising a certificate of employment forged on June 27, 2016, such as the list of offenses 2016, the list of offenses 10, and the list of offenses 3 times and 12, and the list of offenses 3 times and 3 times and 12, and the loan of the above date was received Y.

B. The punishment of the lower court (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, confiscation, and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The prosecutor changed the indictment to "1,00,000 won" and "1,00,000 won" and "3,000,000 won" and "3,00,000,000 won per year" were changed to "2,820,000 won" and "3,00,000,000 won per year" were changed to "3,60,000,000 won" and "3,00,00,000 won per year" as "3,180,00,000 won per year" and "3,00,00,000,00 won per year" were changed to "10,000,000 won" and "10,000,000 won per year," and "10,000,000 won per year," respectively.

B. Each crime in the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty was consolidated and tried in accordance with the ruling of the court below, and each crime in the judgment of the court below shall be sentenced to a single punishment in accordance with Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more in this regard.

(c)

Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, there was each statement at the police of the defendant and at the court below as evidence that conforms to this part of the facts charged that the details of the transaction of the Suhyup account in the name of the defendant, 10 years from Nos. 1 and 2 of the annexed crime list No. 1 and 10 of the annexed crime list, but the defendant made a statement at one time in the prosecutor's office and at the court below.

참조조문

-형법 제38조 제1항

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 (전주) 2017.05.30 2016노241

-대전고등법원 2018.07.06 2018노28

-대구고등법원 2016.01.14 2015노502

-부산고등법원 2016.06.23 2016노129

-서울서부지방법원 2017.03.23 2016노1419