(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.24 2017노3176

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.24 2017노3176

사기

Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment for six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

Defendant .

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of the law, and misunderstanding of the legal principles) (1) 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the Defendants’ speech that the Defendants transferred to the victim K the instant urban development, and even if the Defendants’ speech was partially different from the facts.

Even if it is not only a part different from the facts, but also an exaggerated expression of forecast, the whole purport of the horses that the Defendants transferred to the above victim the city of this case was beyond the permissible extent in light of the general commercial practice and the good faith principle.

It is difficult to see that there is no intention to commit deception and fraud by the Defendants.

② In the case of Defendant A, it was somewhat exaggerationd that Defendant A suffered physical damage due to an actual accident and received medical treatment.

shall not become an insurance company.

(2) The sentence sentenced by the first instance court to the Defendants (two years of suspended sentence in October, community service order 120 hours, and two years of suspended sentence in June) is too unreasonable.

B. Each of the above types of punishment, which the first instance court directed the Defendants, is deemed unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the first instance trial, the Defendants alleged the same argument as the grounds for appeal, and the first instance court fully recognized the Defendants’ intent to commit the fraud of the victim K with respect to the deception and the fraud, and rejected the Defendants’ assertion on the fact that the Defendants’ intent to commit the fraud of the Defendant A with respect to the insurance fraud part of the insurance fraud part.

Considering the reasoning of the first deliberation in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court, the first deliberation judgment is just and acceptable, and it is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the Defendants.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 2017.08.31 2016노303

-광주지방법원 2018.10.31 2018노1336

-인천지방법원 2021.01.22 2020노2991

-광주고등법원 2017.10.19 2016노135

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.08 2017노4241