beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part concerning the second crime of the judgment against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A is a crime of 2 years in its holding.
Reasons
The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: Defendant A’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles on the grounds for appeal are stated as “misunderstanding of facts,” but in light of the content of the appeal, it is deemed that the grounds for appeal include misapprehension of legal principles, and thus, it is so
The same shall also apply to other defendant B and E who asserts a mistake of facts below.
In collusion with D and E, the Defendant did not take part in the instant crime related to the instant corporation V (hereinafter “V”), (violation of the Act on the Regulation of Fraud and Similar Receipt), and the instant crime related to W (hereinafter “W”).
Since the defendant believed that V and W are able to create profits through the public sale of real estate and pay proceeds, he/she has no intention to commit fraud.
Based on each statement of D and E without credibility, the lower judgment convicting the Defendant of each of the facts charged of this case was erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.
The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 1 of the judgment, seven years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 2 of the judgment, one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 3 of the judgment) is too unreasonable.
Defendant
B Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles, misunderstanding V and W’s business structure and profit-generating structure led by D and E, and the Defendant was not in a position to know the possibility of its realization, and was not aware of it.
In other words, the defendant has no intention to commit fraud as to the fraud of the judgment.
B. As the court below did not reach KRW 8.5770,500,000,00 which the court below acknowledged, the Defendant acquired all of the above amount by fraud.
The determination of seals is erroneous.
The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
Defendant
C: The court below decided against the defendant.