logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2017.10.12 2017노324
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant had already repaid most of the loans prior to the filing of the complaint by C.

In addition, the remainder of the borrowed money has the intention and ability to repay the borrowed money with the income earned by operating the future collection, and there is no fact that the victim was deceiving.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts duly adopted and investigated by the police, namely, ① the Defendant under investigation by the police, “The borrowing of goods to South Korea is KRW 300,000,000,000,000,000 or KRW 70,000,000,000 or KRW 80,000,000,000,000.”

“The statement(Evidence No. 42 pages), ② the Defendant himself borrowed money from the monthly average of KRW 30 million at the sales of KRW 14 million, including house taxes, and the amount paid for the repayment of bonds and loans at KRW 12 million.

In full view of the fact that there is no evidence to acknowledge the Defendant’s alternative plan (such as lending from the Gangwon-gu Credit Guarantee Insurance, collecting claims from the Defendant for non-persons without a name, and lending KRW 20 million from the Defendant, and providing tourist bus customers services), it is recognized that the Defendant borrowed money from the Defendant for debt repayment, frequency of collection, even though the Defendant has no intent and ability to repay.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is rejected.

3. The fact that the Defendant borrowed the amount exceeding 50 million won in determining the unfair argument of sentencing is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant.

However, the defendant is an initial criminal who has no record of criminal punishment.

The crime of this case is committed in the course of running the frequency, and it is difficult to take into account some of the circumstances in which it is intended to repay other debts and continue the business in such a situation.

further, the defendant.

arrow