logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 (창원) 2020.05.20 2019노328
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the Defendant did not commit deception while lending money from the victim to the person who is in need of help, borrowed money by mutual agreement to pay the victim a high rate of interest, and had the intent and ability to repay the borrowed money, and did not commit fraud.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (four years of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts is a requirement for fraud. The deception, as a requirement for fraud, refers to all affirmative or passive acts that have a good faith and good faith to be observed by each other in a widely related property transaction. It is sufficient to say that the deception does not necessarily require false indication as to the important part of a juristic act, and it is sufficient to establish facts that form the basis of judgment for an actor to make a disposition of property that the actor wishes to dispose of by omitting the other party in error. Therefore, in cases where it is recognized that the other party to the transaction would not have been in a relationship with the other party to the transaction if notified of a certain circumstance, the person who receives the property is obligated to notify the other party of

Nevertheless, it constitutes a crime of fraud by deceiving the other party by implied disregarding the fact that such notice has not been given.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do7828 Decided April 9, 2004; 2017Do20682 Decided August 1, 2018, etc.). In a case where a person borrows money and takes money, if the other party would have not been lent if he/she had notified the real purpose, the deception, which is an act of fraud, should be deemed to have been committed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Do707, Sept. 15, 1995). Meanwhile, it is a subjective constituent element of fraud.

arrow