2017Do912 A. Fraud

(b)Forgery of private documents;

(c)the display of a falsified document;

1.A.(a)(b)

2.B (a)

Prosecutor (For the Defendant)

Suwon District Court Decision 2016No6635 Decided December 21, 2016

April 28, 2017

The part of the judgment of the court below regarding the defendant A's joint fraud is reversed, and this part is remanded.

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The remaining appeals are dismissed.

1. Judgment on the grounds of appeal

The court below held that Defendant B’s husband L purchased the instant land and developed the said land.

The above permission process, the conclusion and execution process of the sales contract for the land of this case, the defendants and the victim company

Based on the circumstances stated in its reasoning, including the relationship of objection, the Defendants conspiredd to induce the victim.

The Defendants’ joint fraud among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds that there was no proof of the fact

The judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the defendant.

Examining in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s aforementioned judgment as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

There is no error of misunderstanding facts in violation of this logic and experience rules.

2. Ex officio determination

Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that an appellate court shall render a judgment when the appeal is groundless.

The appeal should be dismissed.

According to the records, among the facts charged of this case, No. 1 as to the joint fraud against Defendant A

The Prosecutor appealed after having been pronounced not guilty in the court, and the court below's decision is justified in this part.

Although it is deemed that the appeal by the prosecutor is groundless, the appeal by the prosecutor shall not be declared in the order.

As such, the court below erred by violating Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

[Defendant-Appellant-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee]

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the defendant A's joint fraud shall be reversed, and this part shall be reversed.

Subdivision case is sufficient for this court to render a judgment, so it is directly decided in accordance with Article 396 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

subsection (b) of this section.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Prosecutor’s grounds of appeal on the charge of joint fraud against Defendant A

under the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the prosecutor may be found guilty of this part of the facts charged;

The purport of the judgment of the court of first instance is that there was a mistake by mistake.

However, examining the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance in the record, the first instance court is based on its reasoning.

B) The evidence of the crime as to the joint fraud among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant A

No error as alleged in the grounds of appeal shall be found to have been pronounced not guilty on the ground that there is no name.

3. Conclusion,

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below as to Defendant A's joint fraud is reversed, and this part is reversed.

The Prosecutor’s appeal as to this part shall be dismissed, and the remainder of the appeal shall be dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Dong-won

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Kim In-bok, Counsel for defendant

Justices Kim Gin-young