(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.03.22 2016노8170 | 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) 수원지방법원 2017.03.22 2016노8170

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

An application for compensation by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The part of the defendant's wrongful assertion of sentencing is that the defendant acquired the total sum of 695 million won from 19 times to 20 victims as investment funds for the sales business of officetels, and the crime is heavier in light of the frequency of the crime and the amount of the fraud.

However, it seems that the defendant has paid a considerable amount of money to the victims as a fee or as a substitute for the interest on loans to the victims.

In addition, when the defendant was in the first instance, the victims agreed with the victims other than the victims V, and voluntarily withdrawn their wish to punish the defendant, and the victims V seems to have received the amount corresponding to the principal from the defendant under the pretext of fees, etc.

In addition, the defendant is the first offender, and his mistake is recognized and against himself.

In addition, considering the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and theories of the case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is justified.

B. Upon examining the part of the compensation order ex officio, the court below issued the compensation order to the applicant of the damaged person to pay KRW 11,047,326 to the Defendant, but according to the records, the court below acknowledged the fact that the applicant agreed that the applicant of compensation was fully aware of the Defendant and the Defendant. Thus, it was not reasonable to issue the compensation order in criminal proceedings because the scope of the Defendant’s compensation liability is not clear.

Therefore, the application for compensation order by the applicant for compensation must be dismissed.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.09.21 2016노4240

-서울남부지방법원 2021.01.25 2020노549

-광주지방법원 2016.08.23 2016노41

-대전지방법원 2018.02.01 2017노3262

-전주지방법원 2018.10.12 2018노843