(영문) 대구지방법원 2021.02.17 2020노3022 | 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) 대구지방법원 2021.02.17 2020노3022

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The abstract of the grounds for appeal is not timely filed by the defense counsel after the lapse of the grounds for appeal, and the summary of the pleadings filed by the defense counsel on November 9, 2020, and the further pleadings filed on January 19, 2021 shall be deemed to the extent of supplement in case of legitimate grounds for appeal.

A. Fact-finding: (a) the Defendant did not deceiving the victims; (b) the victims did not have any economic interest after the Defendant was elected to the Superintendent of the Office of Education; and (c) the victims did not have any relation between the Defendant’s deception and the victim’s dispositive act; (c) the Defendant did not have any intent to commit fraud; and (d) the Defendant had financial capacity to repay.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the same grounds as the grounds for appeal in this part of the lower judgment, and rejected the said assertion on the part below the gist of the evidence of the judgment.

B. In addition to the following circumstances revealed by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the appellate court on the circumstances stated in the lower court’s judgment, the Defendant deceivings the victims as stated in the facts charged, and can be acknowledged that there was an intentional fraud between the Defendant’s deception and the victims’ disposal act, and that there was an intentional fraud against the Defendant.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law as alleged by the defendant.

1) As to the assertion that the defendant did not deceiving the victims, the defense counsel had known the victims, and did not deceiving the victims as stated in the facts charged.

The argument is asserted.

(B) However, the personnel of victim F, I, and L shall be the employees of the victim F, I, and the Dispute Resolution Bank.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.16 2018노1985

-대구지방법원 2018.04.26 2018노856

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.16 2017노815

-춘천지방법원 2018.10.12 2018노516

-수원지방법원 2018.06.25 2018노570