(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.11.10 2016노1661 | 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) 대전지방법원 2016.11.10 2016노1661

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant, from November 2006 prior to the transfer of this case, borrowed money equivalent to KRW 97 million from the victim, and the victim was well aware of the defendant's ability to repay, etc. at the time of this case, and the victim lent the money of this case to the defendant according to his own decision. Thus, the defendant did not commit deception to the victim at the time of this case, and even though he did not have intention to acquire it, the judgment of the court below convicting the defendant of the facts charged of this case by mistake of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below also asserted the same purport as this part of the grounds for appeal, and the court below found the defendant guilty on the ground that the defendant, as stated in the facts charged in this case, had a criminal intent of deceiving the victim at least, on the following grounds: (a) the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case and received money from the victim; (b) the defendant did not have the ability to repay the money at the time of borrowing money from the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case (34 pages of the confession statement and evidence record); and (c) the defendant was unable to fully repay the money transferred as stated in the facts charged in this case (38 pages of the confession statement and evidence record of the defendant); and (d) according to this, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that there was a criminal intent of deceiving the victim at least at least

B. The reasoning of the lower court’s judgment is consistent with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2021.04.09 2020노1059

-서울서부지방법원 2014.11.14 2014노1214

-대전지방법원 2016.12.15 2016노2784

-춘천지방법원 2013.11.06 2013노429

-서울서부지방법원 2014.11.07 2014노1185