logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1987. 9. 22. 선고 87도1605 판결
[사기][공1987.11.15.(812),1680]
Main Issues

In case of recognizing the criminal intent of defraudation in the relationship of monetary lending and borrowing;

Summary of Judgment

In the civil lending and borrowing relationship, the intention of borrowing and lending cannot be recognized immediately because of the failure to repay the debt, but in the case of borrowing money or receiving securities, such as household checks, as if the repayment was made in time, regardless of the absence of a certain intention of repayment or the intention of repayment on the date of the promise, the criminal intent of defraudation can be recognized.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 347 of the Criminal Act

Escopics

Defendant

upper and high-ranking persons

Defendant

Judgment of the lower court

Gwangju District Court Decision 87No527 delivered on June 25, 1987

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the calculation of the original sentence.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Examining the evidence adopted by the court of first instance by the court below in comparison with the records, it can be sufficiently acceptable to the court below's measures that recognized the defendant's criminal facts as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, and there is no error of finding the facts with insufficient deliberation and finding the facts. The arguments are groundless.

In addition, in the civil monetary lending relationship, it is difficult to recognize the criminal intent of borrowing and lending as soon as the person has failed to perform his/her obligation, as stated in the theory of lawsuit. However, in the case of borrowing money or receiving securities such as household checks as if he/she would repay in the time although he/she did not have an intention to repay or have no ability to repay on the date of repayment, he/she may recognize the criminal intent of defraudation. Therefore, we cannot accept the discussion that differs from this opinion.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and part of the detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Yellow-ray (Presiding Justice)

arrow