logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.27 2019노791
사기
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s imprisonment (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) against Defendant A (unfair imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (De facto misunderstanding of facts, unreasonable sentencing) 1) Fraud against Defendant C, and this part of the crime led AH, not the Defendant.

Upon the request of AH, the Defendant participated in this part of the crime and committed the act of deception, such as proposing a direct investment to C, only as if the Defendant was prior to investing funds as security.

There was no intention to obtain fraud from the defendant.

Defendant

A is not a person who instructs A to commit a crime, but a person AH instructs AH to use a mobile phone of the defendant in the AS text.

C, M, etc. refers to E at an investigative agency is a person who is not a defendant.

The vehicle disposal cost was also delivered to AH other than the defendant.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds of the testimony of the Defendant, etc. without credibility C.

B) The point of fraud with respect to R does not lend money to the Defendant, but the actual user of the money that R transferred to AG is also AG. The Defendant prepared and delivered a loan certificate to R in the intentional responsibility introducing AG following R. The amount stated in No. 2 of the crime inundation table in the holding of the lower judgment is merely a loan from AP, not a obtaination from R. The Defendant used the money. It was not revealed that the Defendant used the money recorded in No. 6. Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground of the statement of R without credibility. 2) The lower court’s punishment (two years of imprisonment) against the Defendant of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The C’s investigation agency and the lower court’s legal statement on the charge of fraud against Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts.

arrow