logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.17 2017노4572
사기등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

In other words, the act of the supply of mobile phone devices or the act of opening mobile phone services should be viewed as a separate act.

In addition, prior to the conclusion of the subscription contract between the person who reported on the mobile phone loan advertisement and the mobile communication company, the defendant filed an application in advance and opened the mobile phone in the name of the person who reported the mobile phone loan advertisement while being supplied with the mobile phone from the agencies.

Therefore, it cannot be said that the delivery of the mobile phone by the mobile operator was made to the mobile carrier employees who were erroneous due to the deception that the defendant's act of opening the mobile phone.

The lower court determined that the lower court exceeded the scope of deliberation instituted by an investigative agency by viewing that the “act of allowing a consumer to transfer ownership of mobile phones,” which was not included in the facts charged, constitutes an act of disposal even though it did not correspond to the act of disposal.”

Provided, That the act of receiving a horse is an act of acquiring property, while the act of acquiring ownership is an act of acquiring property, and it is not the same as the facts charged.

It is necessary to revise the indictment if there is a concern that the exercise of the defendant's right of defense may substantially disadvantage the defendant.

The lower court, without changing the indictment, recognized facts constituting an offense different from the facts charged, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal doctrine (negative 2). Although mobile communication companies have a civil victim, it cannot be deemed a victim in fraud (negative 3). The punishment that the lower court sentenced the sentencing unfair (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The judgment of the 1st lawsuit on the assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is judged.

arrow