logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.09.18 2014노3860
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts1) The Defendant was paid KRW 150 million as investment money from the victim G, but at the time, the Defendant had sufficient capacity to repay and intent to repay, and paid money to the Defendant with full knowledge of the situation before and after the investment situation of the victim G. Therefore, the Defendant cannot be recognized as having committed deception and fraud. 2) At the time when the Defendant received KRW 30 million as lease deposit from the victim L, the Defendant was unable to expect that the leased object would be actually sold, and the circumstances where L was not paid monthly, the Defendant did not have to have anticipated that the leased object would be actually sold, and thus, the Defendant, who had the capacity to pay, had the intent to commit deception and deception, cannot be recognized.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of a crime of fraud, of the relevant legal doctrine, is to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing transactions before and after the crime, unless the Defendant makes a confession. The criminal intent is not definite intention but dolusent intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do10416, Feb. 28, 2008; 2007Do8726, Aug. 21, 2008). In addition, the subjective element of the constituent element of the crime refers to cases where the possibility of the occurrence of the crime is uncertain, and it is permissible to take into account the victim G portion of the crime, and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, and thus, the Defendant would return part of the share to the victim from around 1300 to 200 square meters of the share of 250,005.

arrow