beta
Text
The judgment below
Of the above, the part concerning Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles 1) On May 9, 2008, Defendant A had no capacity or intent to repay the borrowed amount at the time, in light of the fact that Defendant A had no capacity or intent to pay the borrowed amount at the time of the economic crisis in 2008, on the following grounds: (a) on the part of the borrowed amount of KRW 300 million, Defendant A continued to pay the interest accrued until the failure in the partnership; (b) Defendant A recorded and kept this blacker operated by the Defendant; (c) had a claim of KRW 1 billion against the Customer; and (d) at the time, the economic crisis in 2008
Although Defendant B was unaware of Defendant A’s business, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of fraud with respect to the above borrowed money, there was an error of misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.
2) On March 30, 2009, the part of the loan amount of KRW 440 million with Defendant A was not included in rehabilitation claims in rehabilitation proceedings with respect to “E” operated by Defendant A. In light of the fact that Defendant A continued to pay interest to the victim, there was no intention to acquire money by deceit for the above loan amount.
The judgment of the court below which found Defendant A guilty of fraud in relation to the above loan, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles, since Defendant A and the victim met the amount of additional loan from the Scar Savings Bank for the purpose of paying the remainder, and the interest was used by Defendant A for the purpose of paying the interest thereof. Since the ownership of the Lane was transferred in the name of J andO, no damage has occurred to the victim, and the victim offsets the amount to be reverted to Defendant A out of the sales amount of KRW 1,126,324,000 operated by the victim, or deducted the amount of KRW 211,442,425, which was paid by the victim from the proceeds of the loan from the loan, the damage to the victim would not occur, even if Defendant A and the victim deducted the amount of KRW 211,425,00 from the proceeds of the loan.
B. Sentencing is unfair.