logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.05.13 2015노1375
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) and the statements of the victims and relevant reference witnesses, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case, but it erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court acknowledged the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated at the lower court: ① The evidence of cash custody (the page 98 pages of the trial record) of August 18, 2008, which the victim received from G while leaving KRW 100 million for the instant loan to G, stated only two of the instant commercial buildings as a collateral. If the Defendant deceptions the number of commercial buildings offered as collateral, such as the instant facts charged, the victim had sufficient opportunity to suspend the lending act and recover KRW 100 million.

In addition, it seems that the victim directly opened the instant commercial building, which is a security, and lent KRW 100 million by determining the interest of KRW 3% per month according to the value of the security assessed by himself/herself, and that he/she could not think about whom he/she is aware ( even if the victim assessed the security value, etc., he/she referred to a considerable portion of G, which is a certified judicial scrivener in assessing the security value, etc.).

Even if it is ultimately determined by the victim himself/herself who seems to have considerable knowledge about real estate, etc. for a long time in the construction business, and there was a deception of the defendant in the process of such decision.

(3) In addition, even if the internal problem between the Defendant and D is set aside as stated in detail on the grounds of the judgment of innocence, it is difficult to view that the Defendant is directly liable to repay the borrowed money to the victim in light of the background of the instant lending and the subsequent circumstances.

arrow