logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.02.18 2019노3532
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 12,000,000 won.

A fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding and inappropriate sentencing) (in fact-finding and inappropriate sentencing) Da companies did not intend to acquire the ownership transfer from the beginning of the appeal to the point of not doing so

The amount of punishment (four months of imprisonment) determined is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although C entered into a land sales contract, it did not pay the remainder of the purchase and sale due to the lack of funds.

The money received from the victim as the purchase price for land was used as debt repayment, employee's salary, etc.

The defendant was well aware of this situation as the chief of the headquarters.

There is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact in the judgment of the court below that the defendant has acquired fraud

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the assertion of unfair sentencing is within the scope of the applicable sentences and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the attached sentencing guidelines (one month to one year).

However, the defendant agreed with the victim in the appellate trial.

In consideration of the criminal records of the defendant, such as the crime during the suspension of execution, the amount of damage is not privately used, and the amount of damage has been recovered in the course of trial, and the amount of the sentence of the original court is recognized as inappropriate.

3. The appeal by the defendant is justified.

Pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed and it shall be judged again after pleading

Criminal facts

Criminal facts and the summary of evidence recognized by this court are as shown in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below.

Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is quoted as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Articles 33 (4) and 32 (1) 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Cancellation of Compensation Orders, Dismissal of Lawsuits, etc.;

arrow