beta
Text
All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for a term of one year, and for a term of one of the defendants B.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A-misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, misunderstanding of facts, and misunderstanding of legal principles) The victim’s fraud against the victim C was well aware of the fact that the business prospects were unsatisfy, and accordingly, the victim demanded the Defendant A to provide a security. Accordingly, Defendant A reported the security (provisional registration of the forest of this case) provided through the Defendant B and made an investment finally.
Therefore, the victim does not make an investment in trust of the defendant A with regard to the business prospects, etc., and the defendant A introduced only the defendant B who is a security and a security, and the part concerning the provision of security was conducted directly between the victim and the defendant B. Therefore, the defendant A did not deceiving the victim.
B) The fraud against the victim R was known that the payment of rent was suspended prior to the commencement of the business, and there was no awareness of the deduction of the deposit due to delinquency in rent. Since the lessor completed the registration of the establishment of a right to lease on a deposit basis with the upper party B, part of the money was transferred to the injured party and the victim was provided sufficient security against the injured party. Therefore, it is difficult to view that Defendant A, while being aware of the fact that the deposit was deducted for a considerable portion of the deposit due to delinquency in rent, was linked to the pertinent deposit, it is difficult to view that the part of the right to lease on a deposit with a very low value as having a considerable value of security. 2) The punishment of the lower court on unfair sentencing (one year and two months imprisonment and two months imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.
B. Defendant B-misunderstanding of facts, and unfair sentencing 1) misunderstanding of facts (the fraud against the victim R) and Defendant B did not specifically know the financial situation of the above defendant A or the operational situation of Twitna, etc.
In addition, it is overdue at the time of the transfer of chonsegwon to the victim.