(영문) 부산고등법원 (창원) 2015.10.14 2015노232

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) 부산고등법원 (창원) 2015.10.14 2015노232

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등

Text

The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of three years and six months and by a fine of seven thousand won.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In relation to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles with respect to the fraud part against AP, the Defendant is only the “AS” (hereinafter “AS”).

() At the time of acquisition, there was no intention or ability to take over the above company, and there was no intention or use of 10 copies of a blank promissory note drawn up by AP for any other purpose, such as personal debt repayment, and thus there was no deception or deception against AP. However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles on fraud, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The imprisonment (one year of imprisonment and seven million won of fine) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Regarding the violation of the Act on the AP on the AP of the Act on the AP of the AP of the Act on the AP of the Specific Economic Crimes, the defendant was issued ten copies of a blank Promissory Notes for the payment of the remainder of KRW 700,000,000,000 except for the amount of KRW 1,700,000,000,000,000 from AP. However, the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on the amount of fraud or fraud.

2. Determination

A. In full view of each of the following circumstances recognized by the court below's duly adopted and investigated evidence, legal principles, and evidence rules, the defendant can be admitted as the defendant's deception of AP as stated in this part of the facts charged, and the defendant can be admitted as the defendant's deception of a blank promissory note 10, and at least dolusent deception. Thus, the judgment of the court below (the first part of the judgment of the court below is just, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

① On June 16, 2008, the Defendant accepted AS from AP on June 16, 200.

참조조문

-특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2012.09.06 2010고단1483

-수원지방법원 2016.11.25 2016노4681

-서울고등법원 2013.06.21 2013노160

-수원지방법원 2015.07.22 2015노1467

-서울북부지방법원 2014.07.15 2014노121