beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant: (a) believed and believed that he would purchase the unit unit unit of the locking apartment in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) received the said apartment purchase price of KRW 265 million from the injured party G by transferring the said apartment unit to the victim G; and (c) delivered the said money to J and K by transferring the said apartment unit to the victim G; (d) while the J and K anticipated that it would not purchase the said apartment unit, the Defendant did not deceiving the victim.
In addition, the Defendant had the ability to repay the above money to the victim at the time of the instant crime.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous due to the mistake of the facts, although the defendant does not have the intention of deception
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) The lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s allegation on the following grounds: (i) the Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, issued a certificate of funds and a written consent for the purchase of an unsold apartment in the lock room (hereinafter “instant business”) proposed to the Victim G at the time of receiving a large amount of money to the bond company and issued a letter of consent to the use of funds, and subsequently purchased and sold the lock room apartment again through a large amount of investment or loan, and then purchased and sold it again in the form of a large amount of apartment in the lock room, and (ii) there was little possibility that the content itself was deteriorated and realized; (iii) the Defendant was actually sold in the course of carrying out the instant business; and (iv) whether there was an unsold apartment in the lock room in the process of carrying out the instant business; and (v) whether the other party to the sale was likely to have sexual intercourse; and thus, the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant has no intention to commit fraud.
2) Determination of whether to deliberate is a crime of fraud.