logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.09.11 2015노3599
사기등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Seized cards (Evidence Nos. 6 through 23, 25, 26), 20 copies.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. In a case where cash or check, which is stolen, was kept in the form of a deposit in a financial institution and withdrawn the same amount of cash or check in order to receive the refund thereof, the cash or check withdrawn in the nature of the deposit contract is lost, but there is no change in the monetary value indicated in the amount, even though the cash or check was lost in the original cash or checks and physical identity. Thus, the nature as stolen remains intact (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do353, Apr. 16, 2004). That being seized, the reason for return to the victim is obvious should be sentenced to a judgment to return it to the victim.

(Article 333(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act

ex officio, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the victim D, and I sent 2.67 million won and 2.37 million won to the deposit account of the National Federation of Korea under F on April 16, 2015. The victim H transferred 2.150,000 won to a corporate bank deposit account under F on April 16, 2015. The defendant, on the same day, withdrawn 5.4 million won (=2.6 million won) from the above corporate bank deposit account of the National Federation of Korea, and withdrawn 2.266 million won from the above corporate bank deposit account of the National Federation of Korea on the same day, according to the records of investigation report (related to the seizure of damage amount) prepared by the police, the defendant was arrested on the day of the crime, and seized 7.19,000 won in cash to the above victims, and there was no evidence to find that the aforementioned victims had been seized in cash.

(A) The Court decided to temporarily return the amount of 2,370,000 won upon the victim I's temporary return application. (C)

According to the above facts of recognition, it is necessary to acquire money from victims D and H out of the seized cash.

arrow