logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.08.29 2016노2210
사기
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant entered into an export contract with the company located in Bangladesh and received investments in the cost of loading from the damaged party during the course of promoting the export contract, but did not have the intent to commit the crime of defraudation.

2) The sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant could be recognized that the Defendant acquired 16.8 million won from the damaged person as cost of shipment, even though the Defendant did not have intent or ability to repay. Therefore, the Defendant’s

① The fact that a purchase contract for related products was concluded on September 29, 2014 between the Defendant and the Defendant’s company in Bangladesh, H is recognized.

However, the defendant made a statement at the investigative agency to the effect that the above contract was concluded with the local exhibition, and that the local exhibition may again connect the local company to the local company in Bangladesh (the above contract also includes H's business activities in Bangladesh). If so, at the time when the defendant borrows money from the injured party, the export contract was already concluded.

It is difficult to see it.

② Although the Defendant was able to promptly load the product under an export contract and order, the Defendant asserted that the shipment was delayed due to the examination result, there is no data to support that the shipment of the product for which the Defendant intended to export was deferred due to the examination result at the time.

In particular, even when the defendant makes a statement at the investigative agency on February 2, 2016, the export has been made immediately.

arrow