(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.08 2016노2416

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.08 2016노2416

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant had considerable property at the time of receiving KRW 20 million investment money from the victim E, the Defendant had the intent and ability to receive the right to operate the hotel parking lot and pay the profits to the victim.

However, the J did not transfer the right to operate the parking lot to the original promise, and only did not return the money to the victim due to the wind that the defendant's management is difficult.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court can recognize the fact that the Defendant acquired the right to operate a hotel parking lot and deceiving the victim while the victim is unaware of the intent and ability to pay the proceeds therefrom.

(1) No defendant is aware of his/her personal information, such as the name and contact information ofJ that he/she has agreed to receive a hotel parking lot operating right.

② Although the Defendant alleged that J has given 50 million won premium under the pretext of taking over the right to operate a parking lot, there is no receipts or financial transactions supporting the claim.

Furthermore, there is no circumstance that the defendant made efforts to receive the above premium from J after the receipt of the parking lot operating right has not been made.

(3) There is no contract or agreement between the defendant and J to transfer the right to operate a parking lot.

④ The Defendant used the amount of KRW 20 million received from the victim for personal debt repayment, etc. without relation to the acquisition of the right to operate the parking lot.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. Determination on the argument of the chief of the sentencing department

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2018.01.18 2017고단2675

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.09.15 2016고단3629

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.29 2016고단674

-울산지방법원 2019.09.19 2019고단518

-창원지방법원 2018.12.19 2018고단1494