logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.05.01 2014노3002
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal lies in the Defendant’s operation of the D public embankment as G and Dong, and it is jointly owned by the Defendant and G. Thus, even if the owner of the above sculpture claims insurance money by G, it cannot be deemed that the insurance company was deceiving. However, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court determined that there was an agreement between the Defendant and G on the operation of D in light of the fact that G participated in the production of the instant sculptures at the time when G participated in the production of the instant sculptures, and that G engaged in the production of the instant sculptures at the time of completion according to the Defendant’s instruction.

In addition, since the instant protocol cannot be deemed as a joint ownership between the Defendant and G, the instant indictment was found guilty.

B. (1) In light of the following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant and G were in a partnership relationship at the time of the occurrence of an accident involving the instant sculptures (hereinafter “instant accident”).

The instant sculptures are co-owned by the Defendant and G, not co-owned by the Defendant.

① On March 9, 2013, the Defendant and G, as the introduction of Nonindicted I, are the first space between the Defendant and G.

② At the time, the Defendant proposed that G would work together in the D public domain, but there is no warning about the investment conditions, profits, and loss distribution, which are premised on the business.

③ The period during which G participated in the production of the instant sculptures before the instant accident ( March 13, 2013) was limited to two days ( March 9, March 12), and the contents of the instant work are also completed by the Defendant’s instructions.

arrow