beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles had already been aware of the credit standing of the defendant, and the defendant did not make a false statement about the victim's intent of repayment, capacity to defend, etc., or deceiving the victim.
In addition, considering that the process deed as stated in the facts charged in the instant case (hereinafter “fair deed”) was prepared at the request of the victim, and the victim did not have any intent to enforce enforcement by using it, it is difficult to view the process deed as a disposal act of the victim.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, 1) We examine the argument that there was no deception, i.e., the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, and the following circumstances, i.e., even though the defendant did not have any ability or intent to repay his/her obligations to the victim due to the overdue debts, taxes in arrears, etc. at the time of the preparation of the fair deed of this case (to examine the prosecutor's protocol against the defendant), and without any mentioning the degree of the Defendant's obligations owed to the victim or the status of the Defendant's bad credit standing, the defendant can complete the payment with the amount of KRW 20 million from the year without any mentioning
According to the victim's investigative agency and the court below's statement, the defendant must pay his/her debt at the time of the preparation of the fairness deed of this case.
In addition, I would like to actively talk about the repayment plan to the effect that “CCTV is engaged in a work related to the installation ofCCTV, and that parents are able to pay money even with the help of the farmer's death and the farmer's death.” ③ The defendant is in a relationship close to the victim, and has traded for several years from June 2008.