(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.02.05 2015노3338 | 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) 대전지방법원 2016.02.05 2015노3338

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the court below found the defendant guilty of receiving money from the injured party of the fact, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the injured party merely attempted to help the defendant and did not defraud the victim by deceiving the victim.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., the victim would pay interest to the defendant within several months from the investigative agency to the court of the court below.

The Defendant made a statement to the effect that he/she lent KRW 30 million to the effect that he/she is reliable in his/her statement, and ② the Defendant lent KRW 30 million to the effect that he/she would help the Defendant with no circumstances.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant and the victim did not have a friendly relationship at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant’s defense was difficult to obtain payment by the Defendant, and ③ the Defendant’s age club operated was closed due to the Defendant’s no longer than two months of receiving money from the injured party, and the Defendant provided money without any conditions despite being aware that the Defendant was unable to operate the Defendant’s age club.

In full view of the facts that are contrary to the empirical rule, the court below's decision that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged against the same purport is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant, as otherwise alleged by the defendant.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's business has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime and the judgment of the illegal sentencing.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2017.11.15 2017노6585

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.02 2015노5014

-대전지방법원 2018.12.12 2018노1358

-창원지방법원 2017.06.16 2017노969

-서울고등법원 2016.02.03 2015노3514