(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.06.24 2016노256 | 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) 부산지방법원 2016.06.24 2016노256

사기등

Text

The judgment below

All parts of the defendant A, C, D, E, and G shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment for eight years, Defendant .

Reasons

Although it is difficult to recognize the habition of fraud in light of Defendant A’s mistake of facts and the law of the previous crime committed by Defendant A, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of habitual fraud among the facts charged in the instant case, or erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, or erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, as it is difficult to view that the part concerning the violation of the Food Sanitation Act with respect to “AU” was constituted by the same method as the case of “BJ”, which was found not guilty at the lower court.

Sentencing: The sentence of the court below (10 years of imprisonment and confiscation) against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Unfair compensation order: Although the scope of compensation liability against the applicants for compensation is not clear, it is unfair that the court below accepted the above compensation order and issued the compensation order.

Defendant

C. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: Defendant C took part in the instant crime from July 2015 to AO (hereinafter “instant company”) and took part in the instant crime at around that time; thus, Defendant C should be held liable as a joint principal offender for the crime after the participation; however, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the entire period of the instant crime as stated in the facts charged.

Sentencing: The sentence of the court below (two years and six months of imprisonment) against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Defendant

E Fact misunderstanding: Defendant E did not intend to commit the instant crime with the co-defendants, and the lower court found Defendant E guilty of the instant facts charged despite the absence of the intention to obtain fraud.

Sentencing : The sentence of the lower court (three years of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B, D, F, and G Defendants: Imprisonment with prison labor of the lower court against the Defendants.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.01.29 2015노2537

-대구지방법원 2016.04.22 2015노1436

-서울고등법원 2018.01.25 2017노3047

-대구지방법원 2016.06.22 2015노4644

-서울고등법원 2017.04.21 2017노438