(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.11.21 2019노785 | 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) 울산지방법원 2019.11.21 2019노785

사기

Text

The judgment below

The remainder, other than the dismissed part of the application for compensation, shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Reasons

1. The lower court rejected the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation, and pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the applicant for compensation failed to file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation. Therefore, the part dismissing the said application for compensation was immediately finalized.

Therefore, among the judgment below, the dismissal of the above application for compensation is excluded from the scope of adjudication of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for four years and six months, and Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the Prosecutor by the lower court to the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

3. As to the grounds of appeal, each of the instant offenses committed by the Defendants: (a) each of the instant offenses was committed in collusion with the Defendant for a period of about ten years, by operating a system in which the debts worth KRW 1.5 billion have been accumulated due to the lending of the guidance money to the Plaintiff; (b) approximately KRW 2.617 billion in the case of the Defendant A; and (c) KRW 1.534 million in the case of the Defendant B; (d) KRW 1.534 billion in the case of the Defendant A; (b) the period of the offense was very long; (c) the damage amount was considerably high; and (d) the damage amount was reached by a large number of victims; (d) the damage amount continuously increased due to the Plaintiff’s credit or the husband’s occupation even though the Defendant did not perform any special economic activity; and (e) the Defendant B also was able to receive considerable damage from each of the Defendants in the manner of spreading money borrowed from each of the instant offenses.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제32조 제4항

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2019.08.22 2018노979

-의정부지방법원 2018.04.17 2017노3368

-대전지방법원 2018.05.01 2017노3577

-창원지방법원 2018.07.19 2018노301

-대구지방법원 2020.09.16 2020노1702