(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.06.30 2015노1469

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) 서울동부지방법원 2016.06.30 2015노1469

사기

Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and Defendant Q shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

(b).

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of the fact (the fraud of the victim L) (the Defendant A), upon receipt of a gold transaction offer from BJ, decided to engage in gold transactions using the funds of FO, the president of F, the interest company of the bond company.

Therefore, in order to use AO's funds, interest was required by the defendant, and the victim borrowed the above interest from L to receive counsel's advice on the above service.

The defendant only delivered a talk about financing between AO and the victim, and there is no deception on the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below 1 which found the victim L as guilty among the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by each court below to Defendant A (No. 1: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 2 months, and imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by Defendant Q Q to Defendant Q (one year of imprisonment) in the second instance (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A’s ex officio decision on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A, Defendant A filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of the above two appeals cases.

Defendant

Each crime of the first and second judgment against A is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus a single sentence shall be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the part of the judgment of the first and second judgment against Defendant A among the judgment of the second instance cannot be maintained any more.

However, the defendant A's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

3. The judgment of the court below as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below.

참조조문

-형법 제38조 제1항

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2017.07.06 2016노2163

-서울남부지방법원 2021.02.04 2020노1521

-대전고등법원 (청주) 2017.07.20 2016노74

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.12 2017노4287

-창원지방법원 2016.04.07 2015노2617