logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2020.01.23 2019노761
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The court below rejected part (interest portion) of the O’s application for compensation, but the applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Thus, the rejection part of the above application for compensation was immediately determined.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below which rejected the application for compensation is excluded from the scope of adjudication of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victims of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles knew that delivery may be delayed because the books sold by the defendant are sold at a discounted price based on the order of joint purchase.

The defendant used both the proceeds received from the victims to purchase the books, and reported that some victims suffered from fraud at the latest, and the delivery of the books was delayed, and there was no deception of the victims, nor there was any criminal intent of deception.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which pronounced the defendant guilty is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

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

3. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted that the mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principle was identical to the grounds for appeal in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the judgment on the above assertion under the title “reasons for the crime of oil”.

In addition to the following circumstances recognized by the record, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable in this judgment of the court below.

1. Since 2015, the Defendant has been investigated several occasions on suspicion that he/she received the sales proceeds of child books through the Internet car page, etc., and delayed delivery of books or does not timely refund, etc., and each investigation is conducted.

arrow