(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.08.07 2017노669 | 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) 광주지방법원 2018.08.07 2017노669

사기

Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (unfair sentencing)’s punishment of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence in October) is too unreasonable.

B. The documents submitted after the lapse of the period for submission of Defendant B’s grounds for appeal are considered only to the extent they supplement the grounds for appeal.

1) There is no fact that the Defendants conspired to mistake the facts and deception the amount as stated in the lower judgment by deceiving the victim.

Around the time when the Defendants received money from the damaged party, K Li Triart was fully able and able to give the injured party the right to operate the tegypt and the golf course. However, as the acquisition of K Li Triart was not carried out due to the changes in the situation after the fact, there was no intent to commit the crime of defraudation against the Defendants.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in October) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the defendant B's assertion of mistake, the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts is not accepted, since the defendants conspired to deception the victim, and the defendants could fully recognize that there was a criminal intent by deceit to the defendants at the time of receiving the amount of money in the judgment of the court below from the victim.

① On April 16, 2013, Tae Tae-do and J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”) concluded a “MU” respectively (MU) on April 16, 2013.

In doing so, Section 2 of Article 15 of the above Understanding is automatically rescinded unless this Agreement has been concluded within the contract period under this Understanding.

“The provisions of this Understanding”, Article 16 does not have the legal effect.

No compensation may be claimed to the other party in respect of any statement of understanding.

“The investigation records are 23 pages), and the statement of one defendant B.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2018.12.05 2018노1730

-서울북부지방법원 2018.01.25 2017노866

-전주지방법원 2018.10.24 2017노1620

-서울남부지방법원 2016.01.07 2015노1411

-광주지방법원 2018.11.28 2018노2456