logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.04.28 2017노141
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), the Defendants conspired in collusion with the victim J, thereby obtaining approximately KRW 15.75 billion, which is the net asset value of N Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “N”), and intentionally committed fraud against the Defendants.

may be appointed by a person.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted this part of the facts charged is improper.

① In light of the fact that the Defendants attempted to normalize N by blood transfusioning external funds, but such attempt was failed, and the reasons why the victim disposed of N and the situation at the time of the disposal, etc., the Defendants, upon entering into a contract with the victim on April 29, 2014 (hereinafter “instant acquisition of shares”) by deceptioning the victim’s re-performance at the time of the agreement with the victim.

may be appointed by a person.

② The Defendants concluded the instant stock acquisition agreement without preparing any particular financing method or debt repayment method, and anticipated dolusently that they could not perform the conditions such as the victim’s debt repayment at that time. As such, the Defendants had the intent to commit fraud against the Defendants.

③ Since approximately KRW 15.75 billion, which is a property profit amount as stated in this part of the facts charged, is based on the “N assets and liabilities assessment details” prepared by the Defendants through a direct inspection, it is reasonable to calculate the amount obtained by deception by the Defendants or the amount of damages in the victim’s property.

B. As to the attempted breach of trust, the judgment of the court below that acquitted of this part of the charges on the following grounds, even though the attempt to commit the crime of breach of trust can be acknowledged, is unreasonable.

① Defendant A entered into with the victim on September 18, 2014, as stipulated by the contract for the transfer of shares of V Limited Corporation (hereinafter “V”) (hereinafter “V”).

arrow