(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.02.09 2016노2329 | 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 2017.02.09 2016노2329

사기등

Text

The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

The judgment below

Part of acquittal.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In relation to the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the Defendant did not deceiving the above victims as stated in this part of the facts charged, and even though he did not intend to commit a crime by deception, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) against the wrongful defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) Fact-misunderstanding (as to the acquittal portion in the judgment below), ① the Defendant deceivings the victim L with the status of N representative and the feasibility of sand gathering, etc. ② Although the Defendant instructed L to cut the instant trees without permission, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of each of the charges on this part of the facts charged. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2) The lower court’s sentence against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by authority, the Prosecutor was in the first instance judgment, and the Prosecutor was transferred to the Saemaul Treasury account (AG) account in the name of each Defendant in the name of each of the victims, as stated in Article 880 of the facts charged in the instant case.

“ Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) received KRW 20 million from the victim on May 28, 2013; (c) KRW 80 million on May 31, 2013; and (d) KRW 100 million on June 10, 2013 from the Saemaul Treasury Account (AG) in the name of each Defendant.

"Application for Amendments to Bill of Indictment" was filed and this Court permitted to change the subject matter of the adjudication.

However, this part and the remaining criminal facts found guilty by the court below are examined later.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2016.06.29 2015고합280

-부산지방법원 2021.02.17 2020노3004

-대전지방법원 2016.06.02 2016노507

-의정부지방법원 2017.04.28 2016노3274

-수원지방법원 2018.04.20 2017노6233