logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2020.07.23 2020노622
사기등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant: The sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Public prosecutor (not guilty part of the reason): The defendant conspireds to collect cash in a successive or secret manner with the employees of Bosing, in order to collect cash. The defendant's functional control, such as collecting, distributing, transferring cash, etc., can be sufficiently recognized. Thus, the defendant's co-principal constitutes a co-principal.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s act of receiving only information to receive and remit money is merely an aiding and abetting crime, despite the fact relevance as to the facts charged as co-principal, where it was found that the Defendant was charged with a co-principal, but the Defendant did not receive the entire process of committing the crime from an unfa

B. (1) A joint principal offender under Article 30 of the relevant legal doctrine commits a crime jointly by two or more persons. In order to constitute a joint principal offender, a subjective element is that the commission of a crime is necessary through functional control by a joint doctor, which is an objective element, and a joint principal offender’s intent is to jointly engage in a specific criminal act, and that the joint principal offender’s intent is to jointly engage in a specific criminal act, and to shift his/her own intent by using another person’s act.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s intent to commit a crime under Article 10 of the Criminal Procedure Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2001, Apr. 7, 2000; Presidential Decree No. 20010, Nov. 2, 2001; Presidential Decree No. 200135, Apr. 2, 2001; Presidential Decree No. 20135, Apr. 2, 2001; Presidential Decree No. 20135, Apr. 1, 200).

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6706, Sept. 11, 2008). (2) The above legal doctrine is determined.

arrow