(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.02.12 2014노3210 | 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) 서울고등법원 2015.02.12 2014노3210

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is unreasonable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, even though there was no intention to mislead the Defendant of mistake of fact, and had the capacity to repay and

B. The sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted the same purport as this part of the grounds for appeal in the lower court’s determination of mistake of facts.

The court below rejected the defendant's above assertion on the ground that it was reasonable to view that the defendant by deceiving the victims without his/her ability to repay and intent to repay, comprehensively taking into account the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated.

Examining the following circumstances, which can be additionally recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment due to misconception of facts.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

① The Defendant asserts that, as interest has been paid to the victims for several years, it cannot be deemed that there was no intention to repay and no ability to repay.

However, on March 12, 2007, the Defendant continued to pay part of the borrowed money from the victim E to the victim as interest, and on March 201, the Defendant paid the interest to the other victims.

The defendant could not find any material that he created sales through credit business, and rather, it would expand the business in the situation where 70 million won or more damages are caused by embezzlement of his subordinate staff, etc., and continued borrowing of money from the victims and paying more than 50 million won per month in 2011.

(2) The defendant shall make circumstances concerning the management of the company.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.10.30 2013노2110

-인천지방법원 2019.05.09 2019노713

-서울고등법원 2013.11.15 2013노2910

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.17 2015노2827

-서울동부지방법원 2018.07.26 2018고단945