beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.04.15 2014고단5818

사기등

Text

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On January 16, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of suspension of the execution of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Suwon District Court on June 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 24, 2015.

[2014 Highest 5818]

1. Around 11:00 on January 11, 2012, the fraud Defendant made a false statement to the purport that “A victim C and the victim D, who came to know at the mountain conference in front of the Saemaeul credit cooperative located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, shall be repaid without a mold if he/she lends KRW 20 million of the purchase and sale price of a vehicle.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not sell and purchase cars and rental car business, and did not have any special property and revenue at the time, and even if he received a loan from the victims, it was thought that he would use it as living expenses, etc., and there was no intention or ability to pay it to the victims.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victims, received KRW 20 million in total from the victims, respectively.

2. Around March 15, 2011, the Defendant: (a) was requested to purchase two business number plates from the victim G at the (ju FF office) office in Suwon-si E 2nd floor E 212; (b) was received from the victim G in the name of the purchase price; (c) embezzled KRW 20,300,000 for the victim; and (d) embezzled KRW 8,50,000 among them by using the Defendant’s personal business fund, etc.

[2015 Godan574] On September 2010, the Defendant, through H’s office located in Ansan-si, Seocho-si, a member of the Seocho-si, upon the victim I’s request of the victim I to “a request for a truck forwarding business license”, may obtain a license if the amount of KRW 19 million is KRW 19 million.

'' was discussed.

However, in fact, the defendant was thought to use it individually even if he receives down payment from the victim, and there was no intention or ability to obtain the truck forwarding business license from the victim.

Nevertheless, the defendant is against the victim.