2014No3819 Fraudulent

A

Prosecutor

Lee Jin-be (Court of Appeals) and Kim Jin-young (Court of Appeals)

Attorney Lee In-bok

Daejeon District Court Decision 2013Da4497 Decided November 28, 2014

September 4, 2015

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The defendant, by taking advantage of the poor condition of the victim, has repeatedly committed a religious act beyond ordinary religious acts such as having the victim terminate the contract, and had the victim enticed the victim, but otherwise, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination.

A. Summary of the facts charged

The Defendant is bound by the Defendant. Although the Defendant did not engage in any indecent activity, etc. designated by the Defendant, such as receiving money from the victim M&D, and the husband did not have died of knife, etc., the Defendant did not appear to have his husband. However, on September 24, 2012, the Defendant concluded on the following grounds: “The husband died of knife, her husband died of knife, her knife, her knife, and her knife is no longer complete, and the current knife is no longer complete of the current knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s knife’s k.

1) Although the fundamental principle or character of non-speed has not been sufficiently explained scientificly, it is a kind of non-speed religion that has been considerably widened among the general public of Korea from ancient world, and its meaning or subject is established on the premise of mental and secret world, such as socacy or ear, rather than within the scope of objectively recognizable logic. In the implementation of such non-speed, it is most intended for the requester to directly or indirectly participate in the process rather than demanding the achievement of any objective result. In exceptional cases where a condition is attached to the achievement of a certain objective result, it is difficult to view that the implementer, as the implementer did not act without order to achieve such objective objectively and subjectively, and as the intention to achieve such objective. However, even if the intended purpose was not achieved, it is difficult to deem that the implementer deceiving the requester, etc. without fault, etc., for the sole reason that the implementer did not have any intention to engage in an act without delay as a truth, and if the implementer does not have any intention to engage in the act with no intent to engage in it, thereby deceiving or deceiving the other party's profits.

2) In full view of the circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of the court below based on the above legal principle, the time and circumstances of the complaint, etc., the evidence presented by the prosecutor, such as the victim's statement, alone, is not sufficient to deem that the defendant was aware of its effect without the victim's intent to engage in an act without delay as a truth, and that the defendant took unfair profits by deceiving the victims, or by pretending to engage in an act without delay beyond the ordinary scope of religious activities, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

(1) Relationship between the Defendant and the Victim

The victim has been in mind of the victim's husband's alcohol addiction and violence around the end of 2004, and maintained the relationship continuously for about 8 years until February 2013 after introducing the defendant, who was bound by the defendant's birth. In light of the overall circumstances during the period stated in the facts charged, the defendant and the victim seems to have formed a large amount of friendship exceeding the mere customer's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son.

(2) Even if based on the circumstances leading up to, and the statement of, the victim with priority over the victim, the victim’s husband’s alcohol addiction and domestic violence began at the request of the victim, and there is no case where the Defendant received money from the victim as the expenses for the performance of the contract, and the Defendant did not have the right to demand the payment of money.

On the other hand, it is possible for the defendant to continuously recommend that the defendant should perform an act without delay, such as taking the right to demand the payment of property or taking advantage of the above difficult situation. However, in light of the following: ① the relationship between the defendant and the victim, ② the victim’s lottery winnings several times during the charge period, ③ the name, time and frequency of the victim’s lottery winnings, ④ the victim’s age, career, occupation (the victim appears to have continued to do so as her husband from the beginning of 1991 after the new marriage in 191), and the victim’s husband appears to have been present in most cases like the victim from the beginning beginning date of the new marriage in 191, as stated in the facts charged, it is difficult for the defendant to continuously believe that the defendant did not have been able to obtain the possibility of the defendant’s non-performance of alcohol in light of the following circumstances: (a) the defendant’s act of deceiving the method stated in the list of facts charged, and (b) the possibility of giving the defendant’s early payment of money for about seven years.

In particular, regarding Nos. 87 and 88 of the judgment of the court below, there is no new or new illness with the victim around the time and time indicated in the facts charged, even if the victim received the right to receive the right to receive the right to receive the right to receive the right to receive the new forest, and there is no clear evidence to deem that there is no need for the victim to receive the right to receive the right to receive the right to receive the right to receive the new forest, or that the victim by deceiving the victim by notifying the harm and injury as shown in the facts charged while the defendant aware of the above facts (in most cases, the defendant seems to have received the money as the account, and it is not clear whether he received the cash No. 88 of the judgment of the court below No. 88). Rather, according to the victim's statement, according to the victim's statement, the victim'

(3) Appropriateness of the cost of such act or act;

After receiving money from a victim, the Defendant appears to have purchased or disbursed goods, etc. for the purpose of the victim, such as disclosing the right to receive the deposit or the instrument, or creating the side, etc. for the victim. In full view of the whole, it is difficult to readily conclude that the content, form, and procedure of the right to receive the deposit, including the right to receive the deposit, conducted by the Defendant, falls short of the level of the right to receive the deposit that is generally held in an unlimited industry. Furthermore, in the instant case where there is no evidence to view the Defendant’s change of the right to receive the deposit from the victim to be unreasonable on the record, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant has executed the right to receive the deposit with the intent to acquire the money too much with the intent to acquire the money by taking account of the period, scope, frequency, contents, etc. of the facts charged during the seven-year period of the charge.

In light of the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the above fact finding and judgment of the court below are just, and there is no error of law in misconception of facts in the judgment below.

3. Conclusion

Since the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, judge and assistant judge;

Judges Yang Ho-young

Judges Secretary-General;