logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.12.15 2016노1749
사기
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have the intent to repay and ability to repay at the time of each loan, but the Defendant was merely unable to repay by putting up the prizes anticipated due to the Sewol ferry case and the Mars situation, etc., and did not by deceiving the victim E and D by deceiving the purchase of a building. 2) The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor 1 of the facts-finding prosecutor, even though the defendant could be found to have obtained by deceiving the victim E or F, such as the statement in the facts charged, by deceiving him or her, or obtained pecuniary benefits, there is an error of misconception of facts in the court below which acquitted the defendant about the facts of fraud of KRW 50 million against E, KRW 90 million, and the fraud against F. 2) The sentence of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine by asserting the same purport in the lower court, and by explaining the grounds for recognizing the criminal intent by deception in the “judgment on the dispute point” column of the judgment.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. The following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① victim E consistently stated from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that the defendant lent money with the same false statement as the criminal facts stated in the judgment of the court below, and there are no circumstances to suspect credibility otherwise in the statement; ② the defendant has no import or property other than precious metal sales store; ② after the fraud of victim E, building D and J borrowed money from the victim.

arrow