logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.06 2018노2587
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant used the Mart operating fund from the victim to use the Mart operating fund, and then intended to obtain a Mart loan from the bank. In fact, the head of the Tong was issued to receive and use the Mart sales fund in advance, not the head of the Mart, and the above head of the Tong was unable to make a repayment to the victim because the operation of Mart was difficult, and there was no intention to commit fraud.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of four million won) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On June 28, 2016, the summary of the facts charged, the Defendant made a false statement in D, operated by the Defendant in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, that he would lend money to the victim E.

However, the defendant was unable to pay the employee's wages because of the low sales volume of D without any special property at the time. Since the defendant was also liable to pay the price of delivered goods to the customer, there was no intention or ability to pay the amount even if he borrowed the money from the victim.

Around July 1, 2016, the Defendant acquired 4 million won from the injured party by receiving 4 million won as the borrowed money from the above D.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence in its judgment.

(c)

According to the records of this case, the following circumstances can be acknowledged.

(1) The injured party worked as an employee of the Defendant from the time when the Defendant prepared for the opening of marina business. On May 2016, the immediately preceding opening of the business, the Defendant lent KRW 2 million to the Defendant, who was unable to pay the wages of his employees, and was subsequently returned.

On June 28, 2016, the victim is obliged to pay the price to the delivery company from the accounting staff of Mart on June 28, 2016.

“The Defendant shall hear horses and the Defendant.”

arrow