logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.11.20 2014노2850
사기등
Text

The judgment below

The part of conviction against Defendant A and the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A and C1 of mistake of facts (criminal facts of the first instance court 2014 high-class 513): (1) of criminal facts (criminal facts of the first instance court 2014 high-class 513): Defendant A was supplied for KRW 820 won per failure due to the former model of the M (Defendant C’s partner) which was permitted to produce seeds and seedlings through the brokerage of Defendant C, and thus, there was no deceiving the victims. (2) of criminal facts: Defendant A was aware of the purchase of the former model at a price of KRW 800 per month specified in the application, etc. for the grant of subsidies from the P which was permitted to produce seeds and seedlings through S. However, the fact was purchased at a price other than P and provided to Defendant A with the latter. Since this case was caused by deceiving Defendant A to the latter without knowing the aforementioned circumstances, Defendant A did not deceiving the victims. 2 of unfair sentencing sentencing (an imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year, 200 years, 20 years suspension of execution, 20 years, 30 years, etc.).

B. Prosecutor 1) Error of facts (not guilty part) Defendant A’s chairman does not constitute a fishery community where subsidies can be granted pursuant to the self-management fishery community promotion project. In addition, even though Defendant A’s pre-satisfying failure discharged by Defendant A was not produced by Defendant B (AJ fishery), the lower court’s judgment which acquitted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. 2) The lower court’s sentencing (or the Defendant A with respect to the sentencing of unfair sentencing) is so unreasonable.

2. Before the judgment of the court on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A ex officio, the prosecutor shall apply for changes in indictment with the purport that “Article 83 subparag. 1 and Article 23(1)1 of the Natural Parks Act” among the applicable provisions of the Act to “Article 82 subparag. 2 and Article 23(1)1 of the Natural Parks Act” is changed from the trial to “Article 82 subparag. 1 of the Natural Parks Act,” and this court shall do so.

arrow