logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.10.24 2019노938
사기
Text

Defendant

All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1 of misunderstanding of facts was introduced by Defendant C to issue a bank credit (L/C) for the purpose of issuing a bank credit (L/C) upon the victim’s request, and Defendant B and D were introduced to the victim at the victim’s request, and there was no conspiracy with the other Defendants to deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case. In addition, Defendant A had the intent or ability to issue a bank payment guarantee at the time of the time, Defendant C was in a position to have an overseas bank payment guarantee letter as the Spanish I President, and Defendant C was in a position to have an overseas bank payment guarantee letter as a head of the I branch of Korea, and Defendant B had the intent and ability to smoothly carry out the victim’s revenue business due to trade experience, and Defendant D had the intent and ability to provide the victim with a security, so there was no deception of the victim as well as fraud.2) The punishment of unfair sentencing sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (two years of imprisonment with prison labor in August) is too unfair.

B. Each sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendants (two years of suspended sentence in April, and two years of suspended sentence in June) is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court also asserted to the same effect. In full view of the following: (a) the process and progress of implementing a joint project through the issuance of the instant payment guarantee letter; (b) the background, status and role of the Defendants involved; (c) the contents of each agreement, terms and conditions, and e-mail, etc. explained by the Defendants; (d) the purpose and process of remitting money to the victims; (e) the details of the Defendants’ remittance of money; (b) whether the Defendants consented from the victims; and (c) the circumstances before and after the commission of the

arrow