beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. After the expiration of the period for submitting the grounds of appeal legitimate by Defendant A, the statement in the grounds of appeal submitted by the defense counsel is examined to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appeal.
The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B (1) In 195, the Defendants believed that there was a claim on the said land at the time of the filing of the lawsuit by the lower court of unfair sentencing (2) on the grounds that: (a) inasmuch as the Defendants agreed to transfer the ownership of the said company’s three lots of land as payment in substitutes, I and J believed that they would transfer the ownership of the said company’s three lots of land; and (b) Defendant B believed that there was a claim on the said land at the time of the filing of the lawsuit by the lower court of unfair sentencing (10 months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The misunderstanding of legal doctrine’s assertion is a crime of acquiring the other party’s property or property interest by deceiving the court and obtaining a favorable judgment for himself/herself. If the misunderstanding of legal principles is easily convicted, any person would have to make a favorable argument for himself/herself and to decline in the civil trial system that is entitled to remedy rights through a lawsuit. Therefore, unless it is obvious that the facts in the lawsuit are different from facts and that the defendant clearly knows that his/her assertion is clearly false, or that the defendant intended to manipulate evidence, the misunderstanding of legal doctrine’s assertion should not be found guilty unless it is evident that the crime is established, and the misunderstanding of facts was merely recognized.
The act of filing a lawsuit is not a crime of fraud, and it is reasonable to believe that there is a right which does not exist due to a mistake in legal evaluation.