beta
Text
The judgment below
The part of the defendant's case against the defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (1) since it borrowed money from victims to provide real estate as security or paid interest, it does not constitute an act of receiving real estate without delay.
(B) AL had already disposed of pine trees 11, etc. to another person around October 2010, before preparing a memorandum of transfer on pine trees 11, etc., and even after such transfer, it did not constitute a crime of interference with exercise of rights even if it was written by the coercion of the victim AL.
(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants on the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In light of the legislative intent, etc. of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission, Defendant A’s act of receiving money was imported as an intermediary for transaction of type products.
Even if the substance leads to the actual transaction of the goods, only the receipt of the money without the transaction of the goods can be deemed to have been made without the transaction of the goods, and if the interest of the money is made under the agreement to pay the money in full or in excess of the money in the future, it shall be deemed an act of fund-raising prohibited by the Act.
(2) According to the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court on March 24, 2011 (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do15612, Mar. 24, 201), it is recognized that Defendant A received money from the victims for the purpose of investment, etc. by receiving investment money from the victims in the form of real estate transaction under the pretext of investment, etc. without the intention to develop the business site or development ability, and that the said Defendant agreed to pay the victims an amount exceeding the full amount
Therefore, the court below's judgment that Defendant A received money without delay under the pretext of investment funds to develop real estate in substance.