(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.06.13 2014노339 | 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) 서울고등법원 2014.06.13 2014노339

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(뇌물)등

Text

1. The guilty part of the judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that this judgment.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (based on fraud) or misunderstanding of the legal principles, the Defendant borrowed the above loan amount of KRW 160 million from the victims four times in total as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the court below. However, the Defendant explained to the victim J that the above loan was used not only for the recovery of the check of this case but also for the local business of Thailand. In fact, the Defendant made efforts to recover the said check, and thus, there was no intention of deception or fraud by deception by the Defendant. 2) The sentence of the court below against the Defendant of unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. It is reasonable to view that the prosecutor [1] of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) changed the statement of the J, which was a bribe donor, to the specific part of the facts charged, but the most essential statement related to this part of the facts charged is still consistent; the defendant was responsible for a large amount of debt around the date and time stated in this part of the facts charged; there was a motive to receive a bribe from J; there was a motive for the defendant to act as a bribe; the defendant mobilized AE, a police officer at the same time without any special relationship, or endeavor to directly find a police station to resolve the case of J's investigation; it is because he accepted a bribe; and in light of the fact that the defendant failed to explain the source of the part deposited with the defendant's account on May 15, 2008, which was immediately after the date and time stated in this part of the facts charged, the court below acquitted the defendant as to this part of the facts charged; and there were various objective circumstances supporting the statement of J.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principle.

참조조문

-특정범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2015.01.30 2014노2744

-서울고등법원 2019.05.31 2018노3460

-서울고등법원 2014.10.10 2014노1789

-서울고등법원 2015.08.20 2014노2457

-서울고등법원 2015.12.10 2015노2488