logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.06.08 2017노1672
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
Text

The judgment below

Part of acquittal shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

except that from the date of this judgment.

Reasons

1. Where there are several orders of the judgment, such as partial conviction of a case prosecuted at the same time as a concurrent crime within the scope of the judgment of this court, the sentence of partial innocence, the imprisonment with labor for a part of a crime, and the sentence of a fine for other crimes, the part included in the one order may be appealed separately from other parts, and where both parties have not appealed the part of the judgment of the court below which rendered a non-guilty verdict as to the part of the concurrent crimes, the part of the judgment of the court which rendered a non-guilty verdict as to which the defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal has not appealed shall be prosecuted as to the part of the judgment of non-guilty verdict which became final and conclusive and conclusive at the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 91Do1402 delivered on January 21, 1992). According to records, the court below found the non-guilty part of the facts charged in this case as guilty, and found the non-guilty part of the judgment of the court below as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Korean).).

Therefore, since both parties have not appealed separately, the scope of this court's trial is limited to the acquittal portion for which the prosecutor appealed.

2. According to the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the Defendant received 75% of the fees paid when paying “regional commission” that is not necessary to pay to the sales agencies, thereby incurring damages equivalent to the above regional commission amount and gaining profits equivalent to the above regional commission amount from the victim company.

It is reasonable to view it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is erroneous.

3...

arrow