(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.03.17 2015노3160 | 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) 대구지방법원 2016.03.17 2015노3160

사기

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The request of the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts) was obtained by the Defendant from the injured party about USD 1,563 ($ 1,708,359), but the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On November 6, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and six months for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) at the Daegu District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 14, 2015.

On July 26, 2013, the Defendant: (a) at the Incheon International Airport located in Jung-gu Incheon, Jung-gu, Incheon; (b) using the fact that the victim C did not know the Korean language and did not know the method of purchasing the flying machine; and (c) using the fact that the Defendant received money from the injured party, the Defendant would purchase the Cambodia’s flying machine tag from the injured party despite the lack of the intent and ability to purchase the Cambodia’s flying machine ticket.

“Along with the false representation, she acquired USD 1,563 ($ 1,708,359) from the injured party and acquired it by deception.

B. The lower court’s determination is as follows: (a) the victim C stated in the investigative agency and the lower court’s court to the effect that “the Defendant has given USD 1,563 under the pretext of purchasing the flight mark; (b) but the following facts and circumstances revealed by the record: (c) it is unclear whether the victim made a contradictory statement between the investigative agency and the lower court as to the developments leading up to withdrawal of USD 1,563; and (d) whether the victim’s withdrawal of USD 1,563 was for the purchase of the flight mark; (b) it appears that the Defendant prepared for the victim to purchase the flight mark at the Incheon Airport; and (c) the victim appears to have no special reason for the victim to prepare for the U.S. dollars in order to purchase the flight mark at the Incheon Airport; and (c) the victim is a husband at Cambodia

참조조문

-폭력행위 등 처벌에 관한 법률

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.07.12 2015고단4547

-부산지방법원 서부지원 2018.07.27 2018고정414

-대구지방법원 2016.01.28 2015고단2416

-인천지방법원 2017.03.31 2016고합769

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2016.09.29 2016고단1129