logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.06.18 2013노258
업무상배임등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the fraud, Defendant 1’s mistake of facts) fraud is acknowledged: ① the Defendant received KRW 15 million from the victim on April 27, 2005, and KRW 50 million on May 26, 2005. However, as stated in the facts charged, the Defendant did not receive the above KRW 65 million.

② The Defendant mediated the purchase and sale of P real estate owned by AC and Q Q real estate owned by AH, and the victim purchased the aforementioned P real estate and Q Q real estate.

The Defendant used both the above KRW 65 million received from the victim as the purchase price, etc. for the above P P real estate and Q real estate.

③ Ultimately, the Defendant did not engage in deception as stated in the facts charged against the victim, and even if the Defendant stated the same words as stated in the facts charged against the victim and received the above KRW 65 million, the Defendant cannot be recognized as committing a crime by deception, since the above KRW 65 million was used as the victim’s real estate investment money for “O-Japan real estate.”

B) As seen in (1) as seen in the above A, insofar as the criminal intent of defraudation is not recognized to the criminal defendant, the criminal defendant does not constitute a false accusation.

② Even if the intent to commit the crime of defraudation is recognized against the Defendant, the initial victim filed a complaint against the Defendant by asserting that the instant KRW 67.5 million was the purchase price of R real estate. The fact is that the amount that the Defendant received is only KRW 65 million, and the said KRW 65 million was not given as the purchase price of R real estate, but is given as the investment amount of O-owned real estate.

Therefore, the contents of the complaint of D are false, and it is true that the amount of KRW 67,50,000 as stated in the facts charged of this case is irrelevant to the real estate purchase price, so the criminal intent of the defendant cannot be recognized.

arrow