(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.03.30 2018노47 | 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) 대구지방법원 2018.03.30 2018노47

전자금융거래법위반

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, the lower court acknowledged the facts charged of the instant case as criminal facts even if the charges were not specified on the grounds that there was no indication on how the Defendant specifically recruited the facts charged and committed the crime, and instead, instead of the amendment process of indictment, the Defendant played a role to independently direct the overall crime in several persons without the amendment process of indictment, and thereby resulting in disadvantage to the Defendant’s exercise of his/her right of defense against the principle of unfavorable and unfavorable treatment by excluding or

B. In fact, the Defendant: (a) introduced AP upon the request of D to inquire about the distribution channel of the passbook; and (b) arranged some routes of the passbook distribution to E; and (c) did not play the role of leading the entire crime of this case.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which states the date, time, place, and method of a crime, to specify the facts charged, is to limit the scope of the trial against the court and facilitate the defendant to exercise his/her defense right by specifying the scope of the defense. As such, in light of the nature of the crime charged, it is sufficient to specify the facts constituting the grounds for the public prosecution by stating the date, time, place, method, and purpose of the public prosecution to the extent that the facts constituting the grounds for the public prosecution can be distinguished from other facts. Even if the time, place, contents, etc. of the public prosecution are not specified in detail or some of them are unclear, if the facts charged can be specified in accordance with other stated matters, and it does not interfere with the defendant’s defense right, the facts charged is not specified.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, the public offering is in the joint principal of the public offering.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.12.21 2017고단3667

-광주지방법원 2018.01.24 2017노3375

-대법원 2016.04.29 2016도2696

-대구지방법원 2017.06.08 2017고단2035

-대구지방법원 2018.02.08 2017고단4906