(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2015.09.10 2015노366

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) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2015.09.10 2015노366

사기등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the crime of forging a private document for mistake of facts and the crime of uttering thereof, the forged real estate sales contract was not prepared by the defendant, but it was concluded by K, one of his employees, and the defendant was delivered to the victim with the knowledge that the contract was authentic documents.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion as to the forgery and uttering of private documents on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the lower court, and found the Defendant guilty in all of this part.

In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant conspired with K to forge a real estate sales contract and use it for the victim shall be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(1) A person who has contacted a victim shall be the defendant, and the victim shall have no contact or face-to-face contact with K.

Therefore, even if K prepared a forged contract as alleged by the defendant, if the victim's personal information, etc. was not provided by the defendant, K could not prepare the above contract.

② Although there was a dispute about the method, the Defendant acknowledged that he had shown the above contract to the victim.

③ The fact that the Defendant was unaware of the forged fact is eventually not clear that the Defendant was deceiving K, and the Defendant stated in the prosecutor’s office that he did not file a complaint with the Small K or file a civil lawsuit.

④ When the victim resisted the Defendant as why he had no sales contract, the Defendant appears to have shown the above contract to the victim.

(b).

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.12.11 2020노4344

-서울고등법원 2020.10.15 2020나2013685

-대구지방법원 2016.07.14 2015노3021

-서울동부지방법원 2021.02.08 2020고단3376

-인천지방법원 2017.03.24 2016고정3643