beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The judgment below
Part 2 Change " July 20, 2015" to " July 20, 2012" in Part 18, to " July 20, 2012."
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. (i) On July 20, 2012, when the Defendant received 100 million won from the injured party as to his fraud, the borrowed money is only KRW 50 million and the remaining KRW 50 million was received as the conditional sale price for the instant vehicle. The Defendant agreed to return only the remaining money after deducting the depreciation amount from the amount of KRW 50 million when the victim wants to repurchase the instant vehicle.
In addition, the Defendant paid interest on KRW 50 million to the victim for three months, and on July 20, 2012, the Defendant continued to pay the leased fee on behalf of the lessee until January 2014, even after selling the instant vehicle to the victim. However, the Defendant asserted in the first written reason for appeal that “the Defendant, after selling the instant vehicle to the victim, did not pay the leased fee temporarily to the victim at least 3-4 times after selling the instant vehicle, he paid the leased fee on behalf of S,” but thereafter, the Defendant changed its assertion.
The defendant did not sell the vehicle to a third party at the time, which was returned to the wind that is bound by another crime, and only did not return the borrowed money to the victim.
Therefore, the defendant did not have any intention to commit fraud.
D. On November 2013, 2013, regarding fraud, the Defendant did not take over the instant vehicle by deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged, but rather voluntarily delivered the instant vehicle to the Defendant due to the high-amount automobile premium burden, etc.
B. The punishment of the lower court (the first crime in its holding: the imprisonment of 8 months, 2 years of probation, observation of protection, community service for 120 hours, and the second crime in its holding: fine of 10 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination:
가. 사실 오인 주장에 관한 판단 ⑴ 2012. 7. 20. 자 사기의 점에 대하여 ㈎...