logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.10.06 2015노784
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, borrowed not only KRW 38.75 million but also KRW 20 million from the victim, and thereafter, the Defendant repaid 6.91 million to the victim.

In full view of the above circumstances, the Defendant had the intent or ability to repay the above KRW 20 million from the victim when borrowing the above KRW 20 million from the victim.

Therefore, even though the defendant should be acquitted, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the judgment.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated in the trial of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant can be recognized that he deceivings the victim about a total of 3,8750,00 won, even though the defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, and therefore, the defendant'

1 For the following reasons, the amount borrowed by the defendant from the victim shall be recognized as KRW 38750,000.

① In addition to the certificate of borrowing KRW 20 million recognized by the Defendant, there is not only a certificate of borrowing the Defendant’s 16 million loan from the victim, but also the victim remitted KRW 15,54,00 to the Defendant’s bank account at the JJ.

On the other hand, the defendant issued the above loan certificate in duplicate to pay the remaining amount of KRW 4 million out of the existing loan amount of KRW 20 million, and the above remittance statement argues that the victim again deposited money into the defendant's account by requesting the victim to pay the card price, electricity tax, etc. on behalf of the defendant.

(b).

arrow