logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.05.19 2015노5997
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the statement made by the victim F, the defendant can be found to have failed to notify the victim of the decision to commence an auction of the building of this case. In light of the fact that the defendant did not notify the victim of the fact that he did not return the deposit to the victim even though the lease term expired after concluding the instant lease contract with the victim, the defendant did not intend to return the deposit to the

It is reasonable to view it.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the defendant had no intention or ability to return the security deposit to the victim at the time of the instant lease

On the ground that it is difficult to conclude this case’s charges, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged, and erred by misapprehending the facts and legal principles.

2. On the grounds stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor concerning the facts charged in the instant case was insufficient to have no intention or ability to return the security deposit to the Defendant at the

For the reason that it is difficult to conclude it, the defendant was acquitted.

The court below duly admitted and examined the following circumstances: (a) the victim stated in the investigative agency and the court below that “the defendant was not notified of the fact that there was a forced decision to commence an auction on the building of this case at the time of the instant lease agreement,” but (b) the defendant asserted that “the defendant was aware that he would explain the defendant’s studio construction project at the finishing stage while notifying the defendant of the completion of the registration of compulsory commencement of auction at the time of the instant lease agreement, and that the above registration will be cancelled immediately; and (c) the victim stated that “the defendant would be said that there was real estate other than the building of this case and will be added to the building in the future.”

arrow