(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.03.31 2015노2649 | 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) 부산지방법원 2016.03.31 2015노2649

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant, misunderstanding of facts, notified the victim of the fact of voluntary auction of E’s financial status and assets, there was no fact of deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., (i) the victim did not notify the fact that the assets of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) operated by the Defendant at the time of the Defendant’s proposal for investment from the investigative agency to the lower court were under auction.

A consistent statement, (2) At the time, E’s voluntary auction commencement decision was rendered as of February 6, 2013 with regard to the building and site of E, and (3) the Defendant and E were liable for a debt to KRW KRW 200 million. In general, it is difficult to deem that the victimized person was aware of the aforementioned circumstances, and there is no special circumstance to deem otherwise to have invested in a large amount of KRW 200 million, and (3) the victimized person did not appear to have any other special circumstance. The victim decided to remit KRW 200 million to the Defendant on August 20, 2013, but suspended additional remittance after he/she acquired information, etc. that the E’s assets are in progress at the time of the auction and discontinued transfers, as stated by the victim, and there is no special circumstance to make it difficult for the Defendant to return the money to the victim even if the contract was concluded between the Defendant and the injured person.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2016.06.15 2015노3634

-인천지방법원 2017.12.15 2017노2945

-서울남부지방법원 2017.09.07 2016노1611

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2021.01.21 2020가단2765

-의정부지방법원 2018.07.16 2017노3213