logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.06.26 2019노2576
사기
Text

Defendant

All appeals filed against the Defendant A by the Prosecutor B and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts) There is no fact of deceiving the victim as if he was paid the money. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for six months and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (the fact-finding, Defendant A), it can be recognized that Defendant A conspired with Defendant B to deceptioned the victim with KRW 77 million, thereby deceiving the victim.

2. Judgment on Defendant B’s assertion

A. The deception as a requirement for a judgment of fraud as to a mistake of facts refers to all affirmative or passive acts that have a good faith and good faith to be observed by each other in property transactional relations. Thus, it is not necessarily necessary to make a false representation as to the important part of a juristic act, and it must be related to the facts that form the basis for a judgment in order to allow an actor to engage in the act of disposal of property that the actor wishes to have by omitting the other party in mistake. Whether a certain act constitutes deception that causes a mistake of another person should be determined generally and objectively by taking into account the situation of transaction, the other party’s knowledge, experience, occupation, etc. at the

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, can be sufficiently recognized by Defendant B by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim of the amount of KRW 77 million. Thus, Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

Defendant

B asserts that there was a prior contractor for waste electrical on the photograph transmitted to the victim, and that the victim would supply electric wires at the removal site of E 2 factory.

arrow