beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. On February 2013, the Defendant had been well aware of such circumstances, including: (a) around the end of February 2013, the Defendant, who received the instant goods from L to pay the price for the goods to H; and (b) directly sent the instant goods to L.
However, the Defendant received the price of goods from L around March 2013, and did not pay it to H on the wind to lend it to others, and did not intend to pay the price of goods from the beginning.
B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud in a judgment of mistake of facts, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing the transaction before and after the crime unless the Defendant makes a confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Do2630, Jan. 20, 198; 97Do2630, Dec. 10, 2004; 2004Do3515, Dec. 10, 2004). In the relation to the transaction of goods, whether the crime of fraud by defraudation is established shall be determined by whether the Defendant had intent or ability to pay the goods to the victim as if the Defendant would have intended to obtain the goods, etc. from the victim while there was no intention or ability to pay the goods, etc. as at the time of the transaction.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5265 Decided January 24, 2003, etc.). As to the instant case, the Defendant: (a) decided that M lent the price to purchase the land to the Defendant, and that “the Defendant would work as a factory after leaving the factory on the land on the face of a week by lending the price to purchase the land; and (b) began to lease it to M from February 4, 2014 prior to the date on which the goods were requested to H; (c) from February 4, 2014 to March 8, 2013 (the trial record No. 29 pages); and (d) the price of the goods around March 8, 2013.