logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2021.02.04 2020노3037
사기
Text

All appeals by the Defendants and by the Prosecutor against Defendant A are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A(1)-related to the crime No. 1-related to the crime as indicated in the judgment of the court below, Defendant A did not have conspired with Defendant B, and Defendant A did not have an intention to obtain fraud.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (unfair sentencing)’s punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The prosecutor (misunderstanding the facts as to Defendant A and misunderstanding the legal principles) found the Defendant not guilty on this part of the facts charged in light of the following: (a) related to paragraph (2) of the facts charged, the credibility of the victim’s statement, and the details of the use of credit cards consistent with the victim’s statement, etc.; (b) however, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misunderstanding

2. Determination

A. Determination on Defendant A’s assertion 1) The part of the lower court’s assertion on fact and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the trial court, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by Defendant A: (i) the victim consistently stated in the investigative agency and the court of the lower court that he/she lent money to the effect that he/she would have lent the money to the effect that he/she would be paid a profit derived from a lawsuit that he/she would recover the land under the pretext of litigation costs related to the search of the land; (ii) Defendant A paid money to Defendant B for expenses related to the search of the land; (iii) Defendant B was aware that the source of the money was the money borrowed from the damaged party; and (iv) the victim paid KRW 17,146,00 from Defendant A, but Defendant A paid most of the aforementioned money to Defendant A without using the litigation costs or expenses related to the aforementioned money under the provision or most of the existing litigation costs.

arrow