(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.07.18 2017노4612 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.07.18 2017노4612

사기등

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts as follows, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

A) As to the case of 2015 senior group 1162, the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim V on September 12, 2012 from the victim V, not in the name of the sale price of the complex building 904-dong 102-dong 507, and the above victim actually occupied the D apartment, not in the name of the sale price of the building 904-dong 102-dong 102-dong 102-dong 2015 senior group, and the above victim did not deceiving the above victim.

B) With respect to the case 2016 upper group 2147 cases, KRW 20 million paid by the Defendant from the victim’s zone is not borrowed for the purpose of agreement regarding the criminal case as stated in this part of the facts charged.

The defendant paid 35 million won to AT, which he became aware of through the above victim, at the attorney's expense, in connection with the criminal case of the defendant, but AT arbitrarily used some of them. Although the defendant did not bring a criminal prosecution against AT, it is merely a receipt of the above money from the victim by paying the above amount of 20 million won to the defendant in lieu of AT. Therefore, there is no fact that the defendant deceivings the above victim.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court is difficult to recognize the fact that the Defendant entered into a contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis with the victim as stated in Article 8 of the judgment among the cases No. 605 of the High Order No. 2015, the lower court, upon receipt of the deposit amount of KRW 75 million, on which he/she entered into the contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis.

In addition, it is difficult to recognize the fact that the defendant agrees to terminate the collateral security of KRW 60 million when he/she receives a deposit of KRW 35 million when concluding a contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis with the victim T.

The reasons are as follows.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2018.05.23 2017고합255

-서울동부지방법원 2017.04.27 2016고단2923

-대전지방법원 2018.10.18 2016고단4605

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.11.14 2018고단2343

-수원지방법원 2018.12.21 2018노6162