(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.02.04 2015노2873 | 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) 창원지방법원 2016.02.04 2015노2873

사기

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant was aware of the fact that he received KRW 12 million from the damaged person through the account, but the Defendant did not defraud the remainder of KRW 19.5 million except this, and the Defendant acquired the total of KRW 31.5 million from the damaged person.

The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The argument is asserted.

2) The criminal defendant asserts that the punishment sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable, because it is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor asserts that the above sentence imposed by the court below is too unfilled and unfair.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. On November 2012, 2012, the Defendant charged with the instant charges to the victim C at a place where it cannot be known to the Changwon-si et al. (hereinafter referred to as the “Seowon-si”) and the Defendant attempted to operate a restaurant.

The sales of the franchise that has been operated by the internal branch, and if the sales fund is late, the funds of the restaurant opening business will be invested in money, it will be allowed to operate the restaurant at the same time.

In addition, the invested money said that the invested money would be returned immediately upon receipt of the payment for the sale of the telecom, and the profits from the restaurant will also be distributed.

However, there is no fact that the defendant operated the telecom, and since there was no plan to operate the above restaurant, there was no intention or ability to pay profits, etc. even if he received the above investment from the injured party.

The Defendant received a total of KRW 31.5 million from December 4, 2012 to December 15, 2012 from the damaged party, as investment money, five times from around the same month.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by compiling the evidence as indicated in its judgment.

(c)

The following circumstances, i.e., the victim, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2015.11.18 2015고단1936

-대전지방법원 논산지원 2018.05.11 2017고단438

-부산지방법원 2017.11.10 2017노3125

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2018.10.10 2018고단434

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2016.08.17 2015고단2556