beta
Text
The judgment below
Among them, the guilty part against Defendant A, and the attached list 1 of the crimes against Defendant B’s victim J.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Of the facts of the lower judgment’s judgment, Defendant A1 did not commit the crime, and there was no fact that there was a conspiracy to commit the crime, and that there was no deception by the victimJ, with respect to the fraud by deceiving the sum of KRW 275 million from October 24, 2014 to November 6, 2014.
② As to the fraud that, around October 30, 2014 and around October 31, 2014, by deceiving the victim’sO of KRW 240 million, there is no fact of deceiving the victim’sO, and there was no fraud by deceiving the money.
③ On November 3, 2014, with respect to the forgery and uttering of a private document that forged a contract for the transfer of goods under the name of L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “L”) and exercised it to the O, there was no forgery of the said contract and the use of it through Defendant C.
④ As to the forgery and uttering of a private document that forged a contract for the transfer of goods under the name of K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”) and exercised it to the O on December 2, 2014, there was no fact that Defendant C participated in the use of the said contract by forging it.
Nevertheless, the court below found all the above facts of crime guilty, which is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) Of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine, as to the fraud that Defendant A acquired a total of KRW 275 million from the victim J from October 24, 2014 to November 6, 2014, the lower court acquitted Defendant A, among the facts charged in the instant case, on the charge of fraud, that Defendant A, who was prosecuted for a single comprehensive crime, identical with the above facts charged and the content of the crime in the instant case, committed a single comprehensive crime, and KRW 10 million around October 1, 2014 from the victim J, and KRW 50 million around January 12, 2015, he/she acquitted the Defendant A of the fact that he/she committed each of the above facts charged, but it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine of partial innocence, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
3) Sentencing of the lower judgment’s unfair sentencing (a.e., imprisonment).