(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.02 2016노3573 | 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 2016.09.02 2016노3573

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, even though the defendant could fully recognize the fact that he acquired the name of prepaid KRW 4 million from the victim, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment below that acquitted the facts charged of this case

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that: (a) in light of the following: (a) it is insufficient to recognize that E directly delivered KRW 4 million to the Defendant; (b) it is difficult to readily conclude that unlawful sexual traffic was not committed at the main point of the instant case; (c) as at the time of the instant case, E was aware that economic circumstances were difficult, such as the Defendant was receiving a demand notice to resign from the main point of the instant case; and (iv) it was sent to E by arranging the Defendant’s situation after the Defendant was notified that E would retire from the main point of the instant case; and (c) it is insufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone had the criminal intent to obtain by deception the said money at the time; and (d) the

B. However, in light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment by finding out the defendant not guilty on the ground of the facts stated in its reasoning, although it is recognized that the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the facts charged and acquired the victim by deceptioning 4 million won as a prepaid charge.

① The victim E consistently states that “The Defendant, from the police station to the court of the lower court, did not pay the amount of KRW 4 million from the date of receiving KRW 4 million from the date of receiving the Defendant, even though the Defendant was to pay the amount of KRW 4 million from an entertainment drinking house on April 22, 2011.”

(2) The defendant and the victim.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2016.05.20 2015고정415

-대전지방법원 2014.05.01 2013노2641

-대구지방법원 2013.12.05 2013노2120

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2014.12.03 2014고정114

-대구지방법원 영덕지원 2014.01.08 2013고정84