logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.01.19 2016노986
사기등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

All of the applicants' applications for compensation are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was sentenced to a fine for a violation of the Cosmetics Act in relation to the instant fraud and the ordinary concurrent relationship with the Defendant, and the judgment became final and conclusive.

Therefore, a judgment of acquittal should be rendered on the part of the facts charged in this case.

B) There was no fact that the Defendant sold the E Renovation forest (hereinafter “instant regeneration forest”) to the victims by deceiving them as a periodical product.

The Defendant only notified the victims that the instant forest was a prototype and sold it.

In addition, the defendant did not have the intention of defraudation.

2) There is no fact that the Defendant posted the same article as the facts charged on the Kakao Kao, a Kao case, for the purpose of slandering the victim I.

On the premise that the defendant was engaged in a single machine, only a writing containing his own emotions was inserted in the Kakao Scaro.

2) The Defendant, without disclosing the real name of the victimized person, posted the same article as that written in the facts charged, and the victim did not use any expressions that could be specified in such article, and thus, the Defendant did not constitute defamation against the victimized person.

B. Even if the facts charged in the instant case were found guilty, in light of the fact that the Defendant had already been punished for the violation of the cosmetics, that the Defendant took refund measures against the victims who purchased the instant renewable forest, and that the Defendant is closely against the Defendant’s actions that had not been decently committed, the punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years of suspended sentence in June) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and failure to deliberate, 1) Whether there exists a ground for acquittal as to the part concerning the crime of fraud in this case

arrow