logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2017.11.23 2016노178
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15 million.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of each evidence submitted by the prosecutor 1 of the judgment of the court below as to the misunderstanding of the facts (the part not guilty in the judgment below), the defendant submitted a false transaction agreement to prepare and register ownership change in the Marin society of Korea although the defendant did not actually transacted, and entered into an insurance contract with the victim KK Co., Ltd. with the false purchase price at the price of the false insurance as if he purchased and sold the above horses, and then received the payment of the insurance money. As to each of the facts charged in this part, the defendant intentionally caused excessive insurance conditions by preparing a false transaction agreement and submitting it to the victim, the above act by the defendant constitutes deception of the crime of fraud.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted each of the facts charged is erroneous and erroneous.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unhued and unfair.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles (the guilty part of the judgment of the court below) purchased “G” at KRW 15 million, the Defendant prepared a false contract as if H purchased the said horses at KRW 38 million and purchased the livestock disaster insurance in H’s name, but the Defendant’s act does not constitute deception in fraud. In addition, the Defendant’s act does not constitute deception in fraud.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged 1) The Defendant, with knowledge of the fact that the horse purchase price is calculated at the insurance price when purchasing the livestock disaster insurance for horses, shall be the same.

arrow