beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Since the Defendant was actually engaged in the purchase business of the Jeju Seomundong G G and the development business of Pyeongtaek-si H apartment, and disbursed the money borrowed from the victim as expenses related to the above business, the Defendant is not deemed to have committed the crime of defraudation by the victim.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The court below rejected the assertion of mistake of facts in detail under the title "decision on the establishment of a crime of fraud" under the summary of evidence among the judgment of the court below, on the grounds that the defendant and the defense counsel of the court below have the same arguments as the reasons for appeal in this part.
In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant asserted that from around July 2013 to around July 2014, the purchase procedure of Jeju Heavy Complex G was actually conducted, the defendant failed to provide a proper explanation as to the equity structure or ownership of Japan's investors, investment companies, and mid-gu G, and that there was no fact that the purchase had been conducted during the above period. Even if the defendant promoted the above purchase project, the defendant was in an early stage in which the main discussion on the investment occurred, and was influent state that it was impossible to attract the purchase fund of KRW 100 billion. Even if it was the first stage in which the main discussion on the investment occurred, it was difficult to find it difficult to raise funds to the extent that it was difficult for Japan to meet with investors, and the defendant was not able to repay money to the victim, and the defendant was able to use money from the victim under his/her own name to complete the G project.