(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.05.27 2016노234 | 리걸엔진

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) 대구지방법원 2016.05.27 2016노234

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) As to the 2014 Highest 6704 case in the judgment of the court below, the defendant did not deceiving the victim D as stated in the judgment of the court below, and did not have the intent to commit the crime by deception against the

2) As to the case 2015 High Order 2189 decided in the lower judgment, the Defendant did not deception the victim F, as stated in the lower judgment, and did not have any intent to commit fraud against the Defendant.

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

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the misunderstanding of facts or legal principles 1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the following grounds: (a) according to the consistent statement of the victim D and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant did not proceed with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation at the time of receiving the Gohap from the damaged party’s supply; (b) used the Gohap at another construction site or part of the Gohap for the payment for the labor union members by selling it; and (c) the Defendant was deemed to have no intent to sell the Gohap by resale the Gohap by using the Gohap to repay the Defendant’s debt with the Defendant’s loan borrowed money immediately after receiving the transfer of KRW 5 million from the damaged party under the name of the money borrowed; and (d) it was recognized that the Defendant by deceiving the victim D with a false statement as stated in the above facts charged, and obtained money from the victim D under the name of investment money. In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as seen above, or by misapprehending the aforementioned.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

2) The lower court’s judgment that held that the lower court’s judgment was legitimate.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2016.09.23 2016노1044

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.16 2020노2338

-서울남부지방법원 2017.08.18 2017노515

-서울고등법원 2021.02.03 2020노1419

-대구지방법원 2016.01.07 2014고단6704