A couple who were accused of intercepting the lottery prize money of an intellectually handicapped person who did not know the writing and were not guilty at the first trial were arrested in court at an appeal trial.



According to the legal community on the 23rd, around 2016, Mr. A (65) heard the news of Mr. B's first prize in the lottery, whom he had known about 10 years ago.



They told Mr. B, an illiterate and intellectually handicapped person, "Let's live together, because I'll buy the land in Chungnam."



It was investigated that Mr. A and others used randomly, such as distributing 100 million won to their families.



The remaining money was used to buy the real land and put up the building, but the registration was under Mr. A's name.



They also took out land and buildings as collateral.



B, who had the social skills of the 13-year-old level, later found out this and sued Mr. A and his wife.



The prosecution handed over Mr. A and others to trial on charges such as fraud under the Act on aggravated punishment for specific economic crimes.



In the trial, the main issues were'whether there was an agreement between the defendants and the victims in the process of exchanging money' and'whether the victim had the judgment to deal with a large sum of money'.



The 1st Detective Division of Daejeon District Court Hong Seong-jiwon (Director Judge Kim Byung-sik), who was in charge of the first trial, decided that the accused could not be charged with guilt.



This is because the defendant's claim that'the land and building were owned by the victim, but only registered in front of the defendant, operated a restaurant, and paid living expenses to the victim'.



The judge explained the reason for the innocence, saying, "It seems that the victim has the concept of possession of property," and "It is difficult to admit that he lacked the judgment ability enough to be deceived by a simple temptation."



The first criminal division of the Daejeon High Court (Deputy Judge Lee Joon-myung), who reconsidered the case with the prosecutor's appeal, destroyed the court case and sentenced the defendants to prison terms of three years and three years in prison.



The decisive rationale is that'the victim's mental function is impaired in relation to the ability to transact in large amounts of property'.



The appellate court said, "The act of buying food and buying real estate with a large amount of money on a daily basis is an economic activity that requires a completely different judgment. I had to get it."



“It is difficult to see that there was a name trust agreement between the defendants and the victims,” he said. ".



Regarding the accused's claim that he had "did not know if he had a mental or physical disability," he dismissed "It is not understandable that he did not know about the victim he had known for more than 10 years."



(Photo = Yonhap News)