logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.09.07 2017노1558
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that at the time of the Defendant’s misunderstanding of fact, at the time of borrowing KRW 100 million from the injured party, the Defendant was obligated to pay KRW 80 million to the financial institution. However, since the market price was owned by the land equivalent to KRW 1.1 billion, there was intention or ability to pay the victim’s debt.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. 1) The lower court determined that the Defendant was the criminal intent by deception by taking into account the following circumstances.

A) At the time of borrowing money from the injured party, the Defendant had a debt of approximately KRW 800 million in financial institutions, and there was no particular property other than the land in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul.

B) After the lapse of March 31, 2013, the injured party requested an auction on the above land after the lapse of the time limit for payment, and the court decided to commence the auction on May 9, 2013. However, the Defendant’s withdrawal of the auction to repay the borrowed money.

On December 2, 2013, the victim withdrawn the above request for auction.

C) As long as the victim’s withdrawal of the auction as above, the auction procedure was conducted on March 17, 2014 with respect to the above land upon a request for auction by the senior mortgagee. The dividend to the senior mortgagee in the auction distribution procedure did not reach the total amount of the secured claim, and the victim did not receive any dividend at all.

D) The Defendant borrowed money from the injured party and did not pay all principal and interest up to now.

2) In addition to the above circumstances that the court below properly discussed, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, the defendant, at the time of borrowing the amount of damage, G. in the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu at the time of the borrowing of the amount from the victim.

arrow