logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2019.05.24 2019노31
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
Text

All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court acquitted Defendant A of the charge, even though he/she sufficiently recognized the criminal intent of fraud, on the ground that Defendant A borrowed money from E, C, and D in the absence of sufficient means to repay, there was an error of misapprehending the facts.

Defendant

In order to prove the ability to repay A, the lower court, which did not adopt the fact-finding request on the account under the name of the Defendant A, was erroneous in the incomplete hearing.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution) is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The court below found Defendant A not guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) against E among the facts charged against Defendant A, and of the fraud against each C and D, based on the reasons indicated in its reasoning. 2) In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the court below and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court, the above judgment of the court below is acceptable, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts or incomplete hearing as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3 Defendant A recognized that Defendant A was unable to perform his obligation from May 2015 in this court.

However, Defendant A borrowed money from C on May 2015.

In addition, even after May 2015, Defendant A continuously paid the principal and interest of the money borrowed to E by May 10, 2016.

Defendant

A also paid interest, etc. to D by February 2016.

In addition, there is no evidence to prove that Defendant A borrowed money to D on March 31, 2016.

Defendant

A is the principal or interest of part of the funds borrowed from victim N after May 2015 to E and D.

arrow