beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the Defendants is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by fine for negligence of KRW 5,000,00, and Defendant C.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts in the instant case is believed that the Defendant may perform the legal amnesty with the consent of the J, the owner of the instant forest land, and there is no particular issue as to whether it is possible to do so, and it was not known that the instant provisional contract was concluded and the money was remitted from the victim, and whether it was possible to perform the legal amnesty construction.
As such, although the above defendant did not intend to obtain money from the victim, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.
B. Defendant C’s assertion of mistake of facts is merely an appearance at the time of signing the instant provisional contract, and there was no omission in participating in the instant crime.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.
C. The lower court’s decision on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendants (the Defendant A: 2 years of suspended sentence in June, and the Defendant C: 3 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The court below rejected the above defendant's assertion of mistake of facts on the grounds of its stated reasoning that the above defendant had been recognized to have taken over money from the victim by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim.
The reasoning of the judgment below revealed as follows. In other words, the Defendants concluded a construction contract with S around 206 for the land readjustment project of G District, but failed to obtain consent to the use of the instant forest for the legal area construction project from J, the owner of the instant forest, and failed to obtain consent from J even before entering into the instant provisional contract with the victim, and such circumstance was also known to the Defendants.