logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.01.09 2019노929
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor in the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below acquitted the victim of the charges of this case, even though the defendant did not have any symptoms to the extent that he was hospitalized, by deceiving the victim by means of excessive hospitalization treatment, etc., but the court below acquitted the victim of the charges of this case. The court below erred in misunderstanding of facts

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was individually admitted to the “C” goods of the victim B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”), the victim B’s “D” goods around August 13, 2002, and the victim B’s “E” goods around September 24, 2002.

The defendant from May 30, 201 to the same year.

6. From the 16th day to the 14th day of April, 2015, G oriental medical hospitals located in Gwangju Northern-gu had been hospitalized in the form of symptoms, such as catum catum, etc. In fact, even though they had not been suffering from illness for 16 days, they received an excessive hospitalization for 16 days even though they had not been hospitalized. On June 15, 2011, upon submitting a hospital confirmation, etc. for the above hospitalization to the victim B, they claimed insurance money for the insurance products purchased as above and filed a claim for the insurance money for 4,112,200 won from the Defendant’s bank account on the same day from the victim B, such as receiving a total sum of 4,112,200 won from the Defendant’s bank account, as described in the list of crimes committed in the same manner as above, before January 2, 2015.

B. The lower court’s judgment 1) In a criminal trial, the conviction ought to be based on evidence with probative value that leads a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, the determination is inevitable (see, e.g., Supreme Court).

arrow