(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.08.11 2017노630

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) 의정부지방법원 2017.08.11 2017노630

국민체육진흥법위반등

Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to Defendant A1’s violation of the Act on the Promotion of National Sports, the lower court convicted the Defendant of all the facts charged on the ground that there was no fact that the Defendant made an illegal solicitation to Defendant B, a sports player, and promised to pay for the illegal solicitation. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and two hundred hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles, although the Defendant did not have promised to receive the payment for an illegal solicitation as to athletic games from Defendant A, the lower court found the Defendant guilty, by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 120 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion on admissibility of evidence (Defendant A) (a) a protocol in which the prosecutor made a statement of the suspect who was the defendant by the prosecutor on the relevant legal principle regarding the examination of the suspect (a protocol prepared by the prosecutor on the defendant A) is written in the same manner as the written statement before the prosecutor, in addition to the legality of the procedure and method of preparation, that is, the establishment of substantial authenticity can be admitted

The fact that the contents in this context are the same shall include not only the fact that the contents actively stated should be stated as the statement, but also the fact that the contents not stated are not stated as stated.

In addition, the Criminal Procedure Act is legitimate as the procedure and method of preparing a protocol.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2017.8.11.선고 2017노630 판결

-서울고등법원 2016.01.28 2014노2856

-수원지방법원 2016.06.08 2016노577

-수원지방법원 2016.07.22 2016노1461 (1)

-전주지방법원 2016.12.29 2016노1387