(영문) 서울고등법원 2012.11.02 2012노1544 | 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) 서울고등법원 2012.11.02 2012노1544

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등

Text

All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Prosecutor’s grounds for appeal are as follows: (a) imprisonment with prison labor for five years; (b) imprisonment for three years; (c) 3; (d) and 4 at the time of original adjudication; and (e) imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months; and (e) imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months.

B. Defendant’s ground of appeal 1) The Defendant did not receive KRW 892,424,120 from the victim E in addition to the receipt of KRW 892,424,120 from the victim E, and there was no fact that the victim E and AE operated a financial strategy team of G and recommended investment. The Defendant received investment from the victims in relation to the green business (the business of purchasing the land located in the Jeonnam-gun group and creating a green business complex called “R” in the size of 00,000 square meters) promoted by the Defendant.

The money received from AH apartment from the victim AE has not been acquired by fraud by the defendant because the secured loan related to the purchase of apartment has not been sexualized.

B) The Defendant did not exaggeration the identity of the victim I, and did not defraud the money by deceiving the victim P with no intention or ability to repay. C) The Defendant repaid the money of investment and borrowing with respect to the victim P, and the penalty and appraisal cost is normal, and there is no intention to defraud the Defendant.

Money received from victimsY is normally invested or borrowed in connection with the green business of the defendant, and there is no intention to commit fraud against the defendant.

The money received from the victim D has no intention to commit fraud against the defendant as a security deposit for confidentiality.

2. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant on the ground of unfair sentencing is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court’s determination of the lower court on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is consistent and believed by the victims’ statements, and the Defendant received investment in relation to the green business from the victims.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2019.06.21 2019노109

-서울동부지방법원 2021.04.29 2019노1323

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.16 2016노3780

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.14 2014노1535

-서울고등법원 2013.03.14 2012노3385