logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.07.23 2019노1018
사기
Text

All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Medical records for hospital custody prepared by Defendant B, stated that Defendant A received three surgery on January 20, 2012 on a day from January 20, 2012, and thus, each of the facts charged against the Defendants is sufficiently proven.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence of probative value that leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823 Decided August 21, 2001, etc.). Aiding and abetting is an act of an accessory that facilitates the commission of a principal offender with the knowledge that the principal offender is committing a crime. As such, the principal offender ought to have the intent to assist and abetting the principal offender’s commission and the principal offender’s act constitutes the elements of a crime.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do382 delivered on April 8, 2003, etc.). B.

Judgment

Examining the following circumstances revealed through the records by the court below in light of the above legal principles, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that the defendant A conspiredd the victim and acquired money by deceiving the victim.

It is insufficient to recognize that Defendant B was aware of Defendant A’s fraud and attempted to commit the crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of mistake as alleged by the prosecutor.

1. The Defendants consistently failed from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and consistently, “Defendant A first attempted to undergo a dental surgery at once with respect to the baby Nos. 35 through 37, but, due to stress on surgery pain, Defendant B is divided into several occasions.

arrow