logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.11.26 2015노773
사기등
Text

In the judgment of the court below of first instance, the remaining part except for the fraud in October 201 among the provisions of Article 7(a) of the judgment of the court below and Articles 2, 3.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the judgment of the court below of first instance, as to the crime of fraud against the victim BJ (the crime of fraud No. 2 in the market), the victim BJ bears the employee's meal expenses and flight equipment by his own credit card under an agreement to jointly carry out the apartment development project under the condition that shares are divided between the defendant and the defendant, and therefore, the defendant is only obligated to settle the case with the victim, and there is no fact that the victim BJ deceivings the victim BJ as stated in the facts charged.

B) The victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Modern Capital”)

(C) As to the embezzlement of 22 million won (the 6th crime on the market) of Y, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have embezzled the above vehicle on the ground that there was no provision of bents car under the name of AK as a security. C) as to the fraud of 20 million won of Z (the 7th crime on the market) of 20 million won out of the deposit deposit (the 20 million won was paid to the Defendant, and the 3 million won of the monthly rent agreed from October 201 to the present date (hereinafter “the 3 million won”) is residing in P (the 1.0 million won was not the 3 million won of the loan) without paying one time the 3.0 million won of the monthly rent as stated in the facts charged. As to the credit damage (the 8th crime on the market), the Defendant cannot be deemed to have deceiving Z as described in the judgment of the court below, with respect to the 1.5 years imprisonment with prison labor for each of the 1.0 years following the 1.5 years period of fraudulent.

2) The Prosecutor’s sentence is too minor. B. On the second judgment, the sentence of the lower court is too minor. - As to the Defendant’s sentence (as to the crimes of 1, 2, 3, and 7 in the form of imprisonment with prison labor for one and half years, 4, 5, and 6 in the holding, one year and six months.

arrow