(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.10.27 2017노3916 | 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) 수원지방법원 2017.10.27 2017노3916

사기등

Text

All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court found the Defendants guilty on the charge of fraud among the facts charged in the instant case, as to the violation of the Special Act on the Prevention of Damage to Telecommunications Finance and the Refund of Damage, and found the Defendants guilty on each of the charges. However, since the Defendants and the Prosecutor did not appeal the acquittal portion only by the prosecutor’s appeal, the judgment of the lower court is to be made only on the part of the acquittal portion of the lower judgment, on the grounds that the period of appeal expired.

2. The summary of the grounds of appeal can be seen as having acknowledged the Defendants’ liability for the part that the Defendants did not directly commit the crime, based on whether the Defendants were able to anticipate the additional criminal acts by the non-offenders, and whether the Defendants were functionally controlled. In full view of the fact that: (a) the method of seeking the participants; (b) the method of seeking the participants; and (c) the Defendants were deemed to have been aware that the Defendants were aware that the Defendants were committing the crime by other persons as well as their own team on the same day and in other places; and (c) the Defendants were aware that there was a field team acting in the same role as the Defendants; and (b) the Defendants were aware that there was a functional control over the crime of fraud among the facts charged in the instant case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of judgment.

3. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged of the instant case (hereinafter “D”) obtained the counterpart financial information from an unspecified number of victims by misrepresenting himself/herself with an investigative agency, etc., and then using such financial information.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2015.02.05 2014노173

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.09.18 2019노3155

-서울서부지방법원 2017.06.08 2017노179

-대법원 2009. 9. 24. 선고 2008도6994 판결

-광주고등법원 2019.01.31 2018노470