logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.29 2014노594
사기등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The Defendants (1) misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the mistake of facts as to the fraud and the act of receiving money without delay, and the Defendants did not engage in an act of receiving money without delay since they did not sell the normal goods to the victims at an appropriate price, nor did they guarantee the compensation such as lifelong pension, and there was no criminal intent to commit fraud or fraud.

(2) The sentence of the first instance court on the unfair sentencing (Defendant A: the suspended sentence of two years, the probation period of one year, and 80 hours, the defendant B: the suspended sentence of two years, the probation period of one year, and the 60 hours) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the importance of the instant crime and the Defendants’ attitude, etc., the first instance court’s punishment against the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the defendants' assertion of misapprehension of legal principles and mistake of facts in the first instance court, the first instance court, stating in detail the judgment on the above argument under the title "the judgment on the defendants' and their defense counsel's assertion" in the judgment of the court of first instance, rejected the above argument and convicted the defendants of all the charges of this case. In light of the records and thorough examination of the first instance court's aforementioned judgment, it is just and acceptable, and since the evidence additionally submitted by the defendants in the trial of first instance lacks credibility or lack of probative value, it does not affect the above judgment. Thus, the above argument by the defendants is without merit.

B. As to the Defendants and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendants repeatedly committed the instant crime against many unspecified victims, and the Defendants did not deny the instant crime and do not object to the trial.

arrow