(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.08.29 2019노1670 | 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) 대전지방법원 2019.08.29 2019노1670

사기

Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of ten months.

from the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants: The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (the 8-month imprisonment, the 8-month imprisonment, the 7-month imprisonment, the 2-year imprisonment, the 10-month imprisonment, the 2-year imprisonment, the 2-year imprisonment, the 2-year and 6-month imprisonment, the 2-year and 6-month imprisonment, the 2-year and 6-month imprisonment, and the 2-year and 6-month imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

B. Public prosecutor: In regard to the fraud of Defendant C’s victimJ among the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles and summary of the allegation of unfair sentencing (1) misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant C of this part of the facts charged, despite the fact that Defendant C conspired with other Defendants and acquired 8.5 million won from the victimJ, there was an error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles. 2) The summary of the allegation of unfair sentencing (2) the court below’s sentence against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. We examine the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s grounds of appeal ex officio prior to the judgment.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court acquitted Defendant C on the part that the Defendants acquired 8.5 million won by transfer from the victim J, and convicted the rest of the Defendants A, B, D, E, F, G, and H (hereinafter referred to as “satisf Defendants”) of such charges and sentenced each of them to imprisonment.

However, in this part of the facts charged, the prosecutor falsely speaks to the effect that “AF bank Y is an agent for the victim” among these facts charged, “AF bank Y is possible to open a low interest rate maspbook, but directly obtaining a loan of KRW 9 million from AG bank on condition of opening a passbook, and then raising credit rating by immediately repaying it,” and that it is the victim’s agent for AF bank Y.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.12.23 2016노4084

-광주지방법원 2015.01.29 2014노2250

-대전지방법원 2018.05.24 2017노3155

-대구고등법원 2019.02.12 2018노348

-대구고등법원 2019.01.16 2018노374