(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.28 2016노3948 | 리걸엔진

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) 수원지방법원 2016.09.28 2016노3948

사문서위조등

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts: (a) The letter of undertaking under Paragraph (1) of the original judgment (hereinafter “instant letter of undertaking”) is a document which, in his custody, affixes the seal of F’s corporate seal impression to the Plaintiff; and (b) K forged the corporate seal impression of D’s corporate seal impression; and (c) the Defendant has not forged the instant letter of undertaking.

② At the time of the instant case, the Defendant did not bear the Defendant’s obligation of KRW 350 million against the victim.

The above debt amount is a unilateral assertion by the victim to the effect that “the defendant inflicts damage on the victim due to the theft of scrap metal while removing the building owned by the victim (A).”

In addition, on November 29, 2010, the Defendant and the victim agreed to the effect that “the Defendant has a total of KRW 246.7 million in the possession of the interior works, building cleaning, etc. of the building Heung-gu T-gu T-gu T-building and the right of retention accordingly shall be transferred to the victim, and the victim shall withdraw the complaint.” As such, the above obligation of KRW 350 million was all extinguished.

Therefore, there was no reason for the Defendant to provide the victim with the supply contract of B 201 and 301 (hereinafter “each of the loans of this case”) in the judgment of the court below as the repayment of the above 3.5 million won obligation.

The Defendant received a request from C to lend money as security from each of the loans of this case, and only received a contract for the supply of each of the loans of this case from C as security and received 16 million won and received 16 million won from C to C.

Therefore, as stated in the judgment of the court below, there is no fact that the defendant deceivings the victim.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion of mistake as to the facts alleged by the Defendant is identical to that alleged in the lower court.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.06.02 2014고단2825

-인천지방법원 2018.11.22 2018고단3375

-서울서부지방법원 2016.06.29 2015고합280

-대전지방법원 2016.06.23 2015고단3855

-서울서부지방법원 2016.07.22 2015고단231