(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.10.02 2014노1614 | 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) 인천지방법원 2014.10.02 2014노1614

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the defendant's assertion, it is unreasonable that the court below's punishment is somewhat inappropriate in light of various circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive, means and method of the crime of this case, and circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the following: (a) the fact that the defendant misrepresented the victim in person with the care of the hotel manager, thereby deceiving the victim; (b) the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victim; (c) the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case; (d) the defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment before the case; (e) the victim paid KRW 2 million to the victim; and (e) the defendant deposited KRW 9 million for the victim in the trial; and (e) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant'

B. Under Article 25(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings Concerning Compensation, etc., an order for compensation pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings on Compensation is a system that specifies the amount of damage to the direct property damage suffered by the victim of a criminal act, and intends to seek the recovery of damage suffered by the victim simply and promptly by ordering the compensation to the defendant only when the scope of the defendant's liability for compensation is clear. According to Article 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Compensation, when the existence or scope of

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Do945 delivered on June 11, 1996, etc.). According to the records of this case, it is not clear that the defendant paid or deposited part of the money to the victim and the order and scope of appropriation thereof are not clear. Thus, it is inappropriate to issue an order for compensation in the criminal procedure because the scope of damage amount is unclear.

3. Conclusion.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제25조 제1항

참조판례

-대법원 1996. 6. 11. 선고 96도945 판결

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2015.01.15 2014노4179

-서울남부지방법원 2014.05.29 2014노475

-청주지방법원 2021.01.22 2020노1110

-대구지방법원 2014.08.14 2014노132

-대구지방법원 2013.09.05 2013노2006