(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.04.27 2016노447 | 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) 대전지방법원 2016.04.27 2016노447

사기등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the case of the 2015 high group 3862 of the lower judgment of the lower court, the Defendant was guilty of this part of the facts charged even though he did not obtain the consent of the victim P and obtained the new re-issuance of the card, as he did not use the credit card from the victim P with the intent to repay the amount of using the card.

B. The punishment of the lower court (two months of imprisonment, one year and two months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Examining the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant used the credit card borrowed from the victim P in spite of no intent or ability to pay the price, and the Defendant had the employee taken charge of the credit card by deceiving the employee in charge without the consent of the victim P to use the card. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake is rejected.

1) The Defendant was declared bankrupt in 2008 and did not have any specific property at the time of committing the instant crime, 2015 Highest 3862, and even according to the Defendant’s statement, there was only monthly average income of KRW 60-700,000 while engaging in multi-stage sales activities.

2) From February 2012 to September 2012, 2012, the Defendant used Samsung Card, Nonghyup Card, Nonghyup Card, and galgallon cards in total in the victim P’s name for up to eight months, and used approximately KRW 50 million on a monthly average. This would amount to KRW 6 million.

3) The lower court’s witness P stated that there was no fact that there was no permission or consent to re-issuance of the card to the Defendant, consistent from the investigation procedure.

4) The Defendant had worked for a new office in the process of re-issuance of the card.

W made phone call to the employee in charge of the new card and had W apply for the re-issuance of the card as if the victim P.

B. Determination on the unfair argument of sentencing is made by the Defendant.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2017.11.24 2017고단709

-전주지방법원 2018.11.29 2018고단1949

-서울북부지방법원 2013.07.19 2013고단938

-서울남부지방법원 2017.08.24 2017고단2365

-수원지방법원 2018.11.14 2016나51023