(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.03.27 2013노2144 | 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) 대전지방법원 2014.03.27 2013노2144

사기등

Text

All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the scope of the amount of deceitation by a prosecutor (1) , the victim consistently states that the amount delivered to G at the request of the criminal investigation agency to the court of the court below is KRW 10 million, and in full view of other various circumstances, it is reasonable to recognize that the sum of the amount acquired by deception by the defendant is KRW 20 million and the sum of the amount acquired by deception is KRW 17 million, while it is reasonable to recognize that the amount obtained by deception by the victim is KRW 17 million, and the judgment of the court below acquitted some of the defendants on this part.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (two months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unfair.

B. The sentence imposed by the Defendant by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Considering the following circumstances along with evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts, the court below's determination that the amount of fraud of this case is KRW 17 million, not the amount of fraud of this case, is just and acceptable, and there is no error of mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

(1) After the police and prosecutorial investigation, the victim E appeared as a witness in the court of the court below and responded to the question at the request of the defendant about the amount paid to G several times. In particular, instead of paying the amount to the defendant, G, the creditor of the defendant, made a statement about whether he paid the amount to be paid to G.

However, the victim’s statement is not simply consistent with the amount paid to G, but is paid to G with “cash” or KRW 10 million as “cash.” The victim’s statement paid KRW 8 million as “cash.” The remaining KRW 2 million as “cash” was whether the prosecutor’s office’s office’s salary receipt account.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.17 2018노3015

-수원지방법원 2019.09.25 2019노1517

-창원지방법원 2014.08.27 2014노399

-의정부지방법원 2020.02.06 2019나206057

-의정부지방법원 2011.10.06 2011노43