logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.07.21 2017노1642
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of receiving investment money from misunderstanding C, the Defendant had the intent and ability to repay the investment money, and actually paid the amount of KRW 74 million with the profit to C, so the Defendant did not have the intent to commit the crime of defraudation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous and adversely affected by the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is rejected.

① At the time of receiving investment money from C, the Defendant was merely liable for approximately KRW 60 million, but did not have property under the Defendant’s name, and had been bad credit since several years ago due to default on national taxes of approximately KRW 325 million. On October 31, 2014, even though the Defendant was under the status of being nominated as a means of fraud under the same type of water law around October 31, 2014, it did not notify C of such fact.

② The Defendant promised C to “to import the original fund corresponding to the investment fund in the name of C, and to offer the original fund as security for the investment fund.”

However, in fact, the original party imported the investment money received from C in the name of U, who is the child of the defendant, and did not provide C with any security, and the defendant used the investment money received from C for the repayment of existing debts, office operating expenses, etc. without using it as the original revenue.

(3) The Defendant paid C revenues of KRW 74 million.

One of the arguments, in light of the timing of payment of the above money, instead of paying the proceeds from the original project to C, it receives investment funds from C several times, and returns part of them.

arrow