(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.04.12 2017노1427 | 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) 청주지방법원 2018.04.12 2017노1427

사기

Text

All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles)

A. As to the fraud of the Defendants’ E among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendants would use them as the registration fee in the prosecution investigation process.

The household check was acquired by deceit from E in a false manner;

J. A.I.D.

In light of the fact that Defendant A discounted the number of households issued by Defendant A and divided part of the funds to Defendant B, etc., the fact that the Defendants deceptioned E and acquired a single head of household check amounting to five million won can be sufficiently recognized.

B. As to the fraud against Defendant A’s F, the F has consistently prepared from the investigative agency to the court of original trial, and the F has received a letter of waiver of the right of retention from the Nonghyup to pay the construction cost by receiving the loan from the said agency, if the F prepares a letter of waiver of the right of retention on February 22, 2013.

I prepared a letter of waiver of lien.

“The statement was made to the effect that Defendant A’s obligation to pay the construction price was changed on February 22, 2013, and F was able to exercise the lien around that time.

Since it is reasonable to see Defendant A, by deceiving F and having F prepare a letter of waiver of the right of retention, he can sufficiently recognize the fact that Defendant A has obtained pecuniary benefits that can provide real estate without the right of retention as security.

(c)

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below acquitted all the above facts charged, and the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

2. Determination

A. In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the defendants' fraud as to E, the court below's determination of not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds as stated in its holding is just and acceptable, and it is so decided by the prosecutor.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 홍성지원 2018.11.14 2018고단361

-인천지방법원 2016.04.22 2015고정3055

-인천지방법원 2016.08.19 2016노1454

-서울북부지방법원 2018.02.21 2017고단4447

-수원지방법원 2018.10.18 2018노3833