사기
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.
Of the facts charged in the instant case, the part on the victim C (the second part of the 2015 order 1298) shall be acquitted, respectively.
Criminal facts
On December 29, 2010, the Defendant stated to the effect that “The Defendant would transfer the ownership of the said forest when he received delegation of the sale of the said forest from the owner of the land of 13,859 square meters in Gyeongnam-si, Gyeongnam-si, and the victim G to the effect that “The Defendant would transfer the ownership of the said forest when he paid KRW 500 million with the purchase price.”
However, in fact, the defendant did not pay the purchase money received from the victims to the owner of the above forest and field and thought that he would use the money to repay his personal debts, so even if he received the purchase money from the victims, he did not have the intent or ability to transfer the ownership of the forest
On December 30, 2010, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victims, and then deceiving them from the victims to a new bank account under the name of the Defendant on December 30, 201; (b) obtained KRW 100 million in total, each of 50 million in the name of the down payment out of the purchase price; and (c) obtained KRW 250 million in total from the victims in the name of the balance of the purchase price, on January 26, 201.
"2015 Highest 1297"
1. On December 10, 2010, the Defendant sent down payment to the victim I at the E-authorized brokerage office located D at the time of macroscoping on December 10, 2010, “B was able to pay down payment on the land J at the time of macroscoping, and the remainder was insufficient to exceed 300 million won.
The remaining amount of KRW 200 million is changed. It means that at the end of January 13, 2011, the victim of the above office borrowed the amount of KRW 200 million from the purchase price of the land to the price lower than the amount of the portion, and the interest shall be paid up to one month for KRW 200 million.
“.” The purport was “.
However, in fact, the defendant was invested by other investors while running the real estate resale business, but the real estate resale is not smooth, and the principal and the amount of investment on the agreed date.