(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.10.27 2017노924 | 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 2017.10.27 2017노924

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant found the Defendant to have received repair from E; and (b) the Defendant did not bring about the other party with the repair. However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged was issued by the Defendant, on June 2015, at the time of searching clothes for repair from the victim E, who is an operator of the location of D4 floors located in Jung-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, the date on which the Defendant was in charge, stating that “F was in his/her own possession of the repair to the victim.”

As a result, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim by falsehood, was given one point of 5,800,000 won of the market price from the victim.

B. Determination 1) In a criminal trial, the burden of proving the facts constituting the crime prosecuted is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on evidence with probative value that leads the judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine it as the benefit of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14731, Dec. 23, 2010). 2) In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, E, who appears as a witness at the court of the court of the court below, stated to the effect that it is unreasonable for the defendant to deliver a pro-owned leather to the defendant on June 2015.

In addition, the defendant also recognized the fact that the defendant found the French coatt at the repair house of E, and that the defendant was entrusted with repair to E.

It is also true that there are some doubtful parts in the defendant's statement about the process of acquisition and disposal of the flaced coat.

However, in consideration of all the following circumstances admitted by the record,

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.02.10 2016고정1418

-대구지방법원 안동지원 2018.02.02 2017고단176

-인천지방법원 2018.03.22 2017고단5991

-창원지방법원 2017.08.09 2017고단2290

-서울남부지방법원 2017.08.24 2017고단2118