(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.16 2020노873

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.16 2020노873

사기

Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (Factual misunderstanding of facts and unreasonable sentencing) [1] / [2017 Highest 5708] / [2017 Highest 7420] / [2018 Highest 1087] / [2018 Highest 5964] / [2019 Highest 3813] as at the time when the Defendant entered into a contract with the victims for each fraud as stated in this part of the facts charged should be determined as at the time when the Defendant entered into the contract with the victims. Since the Defendant was unable to sell the agreed land to the victims due to the poor purchase of the pertinent land or the low records of the sale after entering into the contract with the victims, the Defendant deceiving the victims in entering into the contract for the sale of land with the victims.

It shall not be deemed that there was an intentional intent to acquire money from the victims or from the defendant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B) [2018 Godan1678] Although the Defendant merely received an investment of KRW 50 million from the victim AB and did not borrow it, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the premise that the Defendant borrowed the said money, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles. 2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In the court below's argument of mistake of fact, the defendant made the same assertion as the above argument of mistake of fact, and the court below made a decision on this issue in the "decision on the defendant's and his defense counsel's argument" and made a detailed statement on the grounds of the judgment. In light of the records and closely comparison of the evidence of this case, the court below's decision to the same effect is justified as it sufficiently recognizes the defendant's intention of deception and deception at the time of each contract

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.23 2019노4164

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.09.25 2020노1456

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.05 2019노2677

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.05 2019노2887

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.04.09 2021노100