logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.09.15 2015노2680
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for an ex officio judgment.

In the first instance of the trial, the prosecutor filed an application for permission to amend the indictment with the content that the indictment in this case was modified as follows, and this court permitted this and changed the subject of the trial against the defendant. In this regard, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

On March 4, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement in the revised facts charged, stating, “F” in the process of holding negotiations related to the trading of used cars by phone call to the victim B, a middle-sturr affiliated with “F” at the mutual influorial cafeteria-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, and Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, and then sending KRW 26 million to the above consignment.”

However, the defendant thought that he was able to use the money received from the injured party for repayment of debt, etc., and did not have a vehicle to sell to the injured party.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained from the victim, the amount of KRW 16 million owned by the F representative G, KRW 4 million owned by F, KRW 4 million owned by H, and KRW 26 million owned by the victim and acquired the money by deceiving the victim.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

In addition to changing the facts charged by the lower court as stated in the above paragraph (2), it is identical to each corresponding column of the lower judgment, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;

arrow