beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2020.05.14 2018고단4341

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 19, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for forged securities, and six months for fraud, and the execution of the sentence was terminated in the medical prison on April 16, 2014.

The defendant is a person who conducts a sales agency business, such as apartment buildings and commercial buildings.

1. On September 4, 2016, the Defendant: (a) on September 4, 2016, at the mutual infinite coffee shop in Yeonsu-gu Incheon, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, the Defendant made an investment in KRW 15 million to F to pay deposit money to F; and (b) on September 4, 2016, the victim B made a false statement to the effect that “The implementer C is operating a new Etel and commercial facility construction business in Yeonsu-gu, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, the Bank of Korea has been operating the Etel and commercial facility construction business in Yeonsu-gu, Incheon; (c) although the F would have been awarded a sales agency contract with the Bank of Korea deposit amounting to KRW 100 million from other businesses, it is difficult to carry out the sales agency business.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not use 15 million won, which the victim bears as the deposit money of the sales agency contract, but was scheduled to use it as the consideration for taking over the status of the sales agency contract from F. Thus, even if the victim paid 15 million won as the deposit money, it could not be returned.

The facts charged include the following facts: “The Defendant did not have intended to acquire the contractual status without compensation; “The Plaintiff could not purchase the status under the sales agency contract because it failed to prepare the remainder of KRW 15 million that the Defendant had to pay to F;” and “the Plaintiff did not have obtained approval from I for the change of the sales agency.” However, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant had committed deception related to the above facts to the victim; there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(2).