beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant was granted a loan or obtained F’s consent when admitting a card, and the Defendant does not constitute fraud against the Defendant.
B. The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) The purport of the argument that the victim due to the F loan is the BNK Capital and R&C loan company, and that the F’s consent was obtained is that the F did not appropriate the name of F.
As to the assertion that consent was obtained, the Defendant obtained F’s consent in obtaining a loan as stated in paragraph (1) of the criminal facts stated in the judgment below.
However, in light of the fact that the witness F of the lower court stated that he did not consent to the loan (see, e.g., 158 pages of the trial record), and that the Defendant also prepared a letter recognizing the loan received without the F’s consent (see, e.g., title 2 of the investigation record No. 17 of the second page of the investigation record), the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the Defendant received the loan without the F’s consent.
2) The purport of the victim’s assertion that he/she was a victim of the victim F card-related tin and obtained F’s consent is that the victim gave consent.
A judgment on the assertion that consent is obtained from the victim F does not constitute a crime of fraud because the defendant obtained consent from the victim F.
However, in light of the fact that (i) the victim allowed the use of a credit card for the purpose of increasing credit rating, and (ii) the defendant did not permit the use of a credit card for the purpose of paying the defendant's personal debt (see, e.g., Chapter 1 of Title 2 of the Investigation Records No. 39), and (iii) the defendant prepared a written statement to the effect that "the defendant would be liable for the use of a credit card for personal purpose" (see, e.g., Title 2 of the Investigation Records No. 17 pages No. 2 of the Act), the victim's credit card exceeds the extent the defendant consented.