(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.11.10 2016노6309 | 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) 수원지방법원 2016.11.10 2016노6309

사기등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (1) There was no fact that the Defendant “publically recruited” with regard to the specific details of the instant fraud crime with telephone financial fraud assistance officers.

The Defendant’s act of withdrawing cash from the means of access is only a realizing the proceeds of crime after the fraudulent act led to the occurrence of the fraud by means of telephone financial fraud to the account, not an “act of execution” as a joint principal offender of fraud.

Since the defendant cannot be deemed to have committed the crime of this case through a functional control by a joint doctor, the defendant cannot be deemed to be a joint principal offender of the crime of this case.

(2) As seen above, insofar as the act of withdrawing the defrauded money already transferred to an account cannot be deemed to constitute fraud or other criminal acts, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s act of keeping the check card by delivering it for the purpose of withdrawing the defrauded money deposited to an account does not mean that the Defendant has received and kept the means of access “ knowing that it would be used for a crime or for a crime” as prescribed by the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.

(3) Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the “purpose, etc. for the use of crime” under the joint principal offense of fraud and the crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant recognized a mistake as to supporting the Defendant in the crime of telephone financial fraud; (b) the total amount of the money obtained by deception of the instant fraud is KRW 27,495,00, but the cash withdrawn by the Defendant is relatively small of KRW 4,895,000; (c) the Defendant’s profit was 450,000 won; and (d) the Defendant’s health condition was not good, the sentence of the lower court sentenced to two years of imprisonment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

참조조문

-전자금융거래법

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 서부지원 2019.11.08 2019고단1075

-부산지방법원 2020.06.04 2020고단429

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.10 2019고단2869

-서울서부지방법원 2019.10.10 2019노988

-인천지방법원 2019.09.26 2019노1846