(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2014.06.26 2013고단1349

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) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2014.06.26 2013고단1349

사기

Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

An application filed by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that even if the Defendant was provided with the horses from the victim C and D and sold them, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to make a timely payment to the victims even if he was provided with the horses from the victims and sold them.

Nevertheless, the Defendant made a false statement to the victims stating that “B will pay the price by means of money sold by the face-to-face and the horse.” From January 2007 to April 2007, the Defendant received approximately KRW 1500 kms (23 million per market price) from the victims C, and acquired approximately KRW 500 kms (23 million per market price) from the victims from February 2007 to March 2007, and acquired approximately KRW 500 kms (11 million per market price) from the victims.

2. The Defendant does not consistently deny the facts charged from the first trial date to recognize the contents of the protocol of interrogation of a suspect prepared by the police. As such, the Defendant recognized the contents of the above protocol and recognized the contents of the protocol of interrogation of a suspect prepared by the police should deny admissibility of evidence of the protocol of interrogation prepared

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do5040, Jun. 24, 2010). Therefore, the police interrogation protocol against the defendant as shown in the facts charged is inadmissible.

As stated in the facts charged, the defendant recognized the fact that he received the horses from the victims, and sold the horses received from the victims, but did not pay the amount to the victims, and it seems that the amount of sales of the horses received from the victims was used for other purposes.

However, the defendant purchased the horses from the victims.

Since the defendant uses the sale price for other purposes, he/she shall be aware of the crime of fraud immediately.

참조판례

-대법원 2010. 6. 24. 선고 2010도5040 판결

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2015.04.14 2014노1651

-대구지방법원 2018.05.09 2017나313507

-광주지방법원 해남지원 2018.08.28 2017가단21982

-대구지방법원 2019.02.14 2017나313101

-광주지방법원해남지원 2019.02.19 2017가단20309