logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.12.19 2013노2532
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years and fine for 3,200,000 won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts - Since the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) is nothing more than the data referred to the decision on the price of the welfare aid notified by the import declaration certificate which was issued by the defendant by false report, the act of submitting the import declaration certificate does not constitute deception, and the causal relationship between the submission of the import declaration certificate and the above price decision is not recognized

B. Legal principles - In calculating the amount of fraud related to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), the court below recognized the total sum of health care benefit received from the National Health Insurance Corporation as the total sum of health care benefit received from the National Health Insurance Corporation although the business office, etc. should deduct the appropriate amount of health care benefit and the profit of welfare equipment from the amount of health care

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (at least three years of imprisonment and a fine at least 3.2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor, at the trial court, obtained by deceptioning KRW 4,27,435,432 from the last day of the facts charged under paragraph (2) of this Article, "4,27,435,432," and applied for permission to change the indictment in addition to "Article 347 (2) of the Criminal Act" in the applicable provisions of this Act. Since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.

3...

arrow