(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.07.12 2017노1705 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.07.12 2017노1705

사기

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Victim E (hereinafter “victim”) was aware of the circumstances about the financial status and acquisition of D (State) through pro-gu G and the Defendant, and the Defendant was aware of the fact, and was given a loan of KRW 150 million to the Defendant on his own, and there was no statement that “If the Defendant borrowed KRW 150 million to the victim, he would receive the price for supply from F.” Thus, the Defendant acquired money by deceiving the victim.

Although it cannot be seen otherwise, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment) that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s determination on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail on the part of “determination on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion” in the written judgment.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in comparison with the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged by the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. The instant crime of determining unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor is a favorable circumstance that it is necessary to determine the punishment in consideration of equity with the case where the instant crime was committed in relation to the crime of obstructing the exercise of rights that became final and conclusive on June 6, 2014 and the crime of obstructing a group of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

On the other hand, the amount of damage caused by the crime of this case is a large amount of KRW 150 million, and the defendant did not agree with the victim until the trial of the party.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2018.01.24 2017노3732

-서울남부지방법원 2021.01.26 2020노2294

-광주지방법원 2017.08.09 2017노1376

-광주지방법원 2017.11.15 2017노1318

-서울남부지방법원 2017.04.14 2016노2327