beta
Text
The judgment below
Part of the compensation order shall be reversed.
The application of the applicant for compensation by the court below shall be dismissed.
Defendant.
Reasons
1. The sentence of the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio the defendant's grounds for appeal prior to the judgment ex officio.
The compensation order pursuant to the provisions of Article 25 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is a system in which the amount of direct property damage suffered by a victim of a criminal act is specified and the extent of compensation liability of a defendant is clear, and it is easy and prompt to order compensation from a defendant to seek the recovery of damage suffered by a victim. According to the provisions of paragraph (3) 3 of the same Article, when the existence or scope of compensation of a defendant is unclear, the compensation order shall not be issued, and in such a case, the court shall reject the application for compensation order by its ruling pursuant to the provisions of Article 32
According to the records, even though the fact that the defendant acquired a total of 200 million won from the victim B for the construction cost, the fact that the defendant performed part of the construction work is recognized, and the amount of the construction cost is not clear in the records (the defendant claims that the construction work equivalent to KRW 120 million was carried out, while the victim B stated in the investigation agency that "the victim B made a fact that part of the foundation construction and reinforcement construction work was carried out, but the subcontractor did not pay the subcontract price, and the subcontractor is exercising the right of retention). It cannot be said that it is clear that the amount the defendant is liable for compensation to the victim B.
Therefore, although the court below's application for compensation B, which is the applicant for compensation, falls under the case where the scope of the defendant's liability for compensation is not clear, the court below ordered the full amount of the money obtained by deceit. Since the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the compensation order, this part is added.