(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.10.20 2020노1881 | 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) 광주지방법원 2020.10.20 2020노1881

사기

Text

The appeal against the defendant's part on the defendant's case is dismissed.

The judgment below

Among them, compensation order against the applicant for compensation.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for up to eight months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case as to the grounds for appeal, the defendant paid 50,000 won to the victim B at the court below and 130,000 won to the victim B, and fully repaid the money obtained by deceit to the above victim, etc. is more favorable, but there are several criminal records including punishment, and the total amount obtained by the defendant is not less than KRW 1,473,00,000, and there is no damage recovery with respect to the victim H and D.

Although there is a change in circumstances in which the Defendant paid KRW 1.30,00 to the victim B by this court, considering the degree of damage recovery compared to the total amount of the Defendant’s fraud, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be a cause to reduce the amount of punishment. In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

3. When the defendant, ex officio, files an appeal against a conviction against a request for compensation order, the compensation order is transferred to the appellate court along with the defendant's case pursuant to Article 33 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, even if the defendant does not object to the compensation order, so the part of the compensation order against the applicant

On the other hand, it is judged that the existence or scope of liability for compensation is not clear by paying all the money that the defendant acquired by defraudation to the applicant for compensation who is the victim in this court.

Therefore, among the judgment below, the compensation order part against the applicant for compensation cannot be maintained as it is.

4. In conclusion, the appeal against the defendant's part of the defendant's case is groundless.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제33조 제1항

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2020.10.06 2019노1886

-광주지방법원 2020.11.17 2020노1149

-인천지방법원 2021.04.29 2020노4540

-수원지방법원 2020.10.26 2020노4089

-창원지방법원 2019.07.25 2019노974