logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.06.15 2017노40
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. All parts 1, 4, and 10 of the crime list Nos. 1, 4, and 10 of the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles are all F, and the defendant was not the defendant.

The judgment of the court below that recognized each of the above parts as the defendant's fraud is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

The court below found the defendant guilty by adding G ex officio to the victim if the defendant had deceivingd the victim D beyond the scope of prosecution and acquired the property, etc. over 12 times in total as stated in its decision by deceiving G, the spouse of the defendant, as well as G, which was the victim. This is also a violation of the principle of infinite and unfavorable treatment, and it is also a violation of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by adding it to the fact that it has not been prosecuted by violating the principle of infinite and disadvantageous treatment, and adding the charges to the disadvantage of the defendant without any changes in the indictment procedure.

Although the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, regardless of the above reasons for reversal ex officio.

B. (1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below in light of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant, as stated in the No. 1, 4, and 10 List of Crimes Nos. 1, 4, and 10, did not have the victim with the right to operate the restaurant at the construction site or with no intent or ability to provide the victim with the vehicle in the future, and that there was a criminal intent to acquire the property, etc. by deception as stated in its reasoning.

(A) Part 1 of the list of crimes in the annexed sheet of crimes ① All the victims and their spouses.

arrow