logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.10.14 2015노1792
사기등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (i.e., mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) notified theO of the forgery of a lease agreement made in the name of a lessor C, on December 14, 201.

In addition, as the defendant had a considerable amount of claim against O at the time of borrowing money from O, there was no fact of deceiving theO, and there was no intention of deceiving the money fromO.

Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (7 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, may exercise the right to claim for the return of the lease deposit amount of KRW 80,351,00,000 from the victim by deceiving the victim that the Defendant would transfer the right to claim for the return of the lease deposit amount of KRW 80,00,00 to the victim under the pretext of security by deceiving the lessor to the effect that the lease contract of KRW 80,00 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) was forged by the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, was delivered by the lessor of KRW 80,00,00, as the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,351,000.

(1) In the investigation agency and the court of original instance, the O borrowed KRW 10,351,00 to the Defendant and received the claim for the refund of the lease deposit against C under its collateral. The instant lease contract was forged.

arrow