beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.11.05 2013고단3320

사기등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 10, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment at the Gwangju District Court for fraud, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 5, 2013, and on March 29, 2013, the Defendant was indicted for non-detained as a crime of fraud at the Gwangju District Court, and was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment on July 25, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 29, 2014.

I. Around September 25, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around the same day, at a mutually infinite shop located in the Dobong-gu, Gwangju, Gwangju; (b) around September 25, 2012, the victim C and the victim D: (c) concluded a contract to grant mobile phone productization; and (d) paid the character fee and the cost of producing a mobile phone case in E in which the mobile phone product is manufactured and sold; (b) however, if the cost of producing a mobile phone case is limited to the cost of production due to the fact that the user fee, etc. has already been already paid, the Defendant may obtain profits by producing the mobile phone case; (c) the victim C would distribute the profits of 15% per month for the victim D; and (d) the victim C’s dividends amount to KRW 100,000 per month for a business failure during the term of the contract; and (d) the victim’s dividends amount to KRW 700,000 per month for a continuous loan period.”

However, on August 10, 2012, the Defendant entered into a contract for the grant of a mobile phone commercialization with the FF which owns intellectual property rights to E, but it is at the risk of rescinding the contract due to the lack of intellectual property fees and the forged prevention mark cost from the FF, so it was not possible to run the business of manufacturing and selling the mobile phone normally even if it is invested by the victims, and it was unclear whether to obtain profits even if it is conducted the aforementioned mobile phone case manufacturing and selling business, and there was no intention or ability to pay the money received from the victims.

The Defendant is as above.