beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2016.08.25 2014고합83

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On December 21, 2010, the Defendant entered into a contract with E to jointly operate a “F hotel” operated by Pyeongtaek-si D (hereinafter “instant hotel”) on a condition that he/she paid KRW 270 million to E under the pretext of the contract deposit, but failed to pay the intermediate payment and the balance, thereby cancelling the contract.

As the Defendant did not receive the above down payment of KRW 270 million from E, he had the intent to recover the amount equivalent to the down payment from other investors by coloring the said down payment. On June 2012, the Defendant tried to transfer the hotel management right at KRW 3.3 billion to the victim I at the H Co., Ltd. located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “H”) office (hereinafter “H”). The Defendant would jointly take over and operate the hotel as well as take over and operate the hotel at KRW 3.3 billion. As such, the Defendant would have jointly take over and operate the hotel. If the Defendant paid the down payment of KRW 270 million from the down payment and KRW 350 million from the first intermediate payment, the remainder of the intermediate payment and the remainder amount of KRW 2.75 billion in total would be borne by the victim.

“.....”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any special property or income at the time, and it was difficult for the Defendant to repay the amount of the apartment loan with the Defendant’s wife’s loan as collateral, and there was no economic situation to the extent that the apartment house will be sold at a voluntary auction around April 2012. As such, even if the Defendant paid part of the hotel down payment and intermediate payment of this case, the remainder of the intermediate payment and the intermediate payment promised to acquire the right of management of the hotel from E and did not have the intent or ability to operate the hotel jointly with the victim, as well as the Defendant

Since the victim recognized KRW 270 million as KRW 300,000 and decided to substitute for the contract deposit concluded with the victim, the victim's delivery of KRW 200,000 to E as the contract deposit, and instead, he/she individually uses the defendant's debt repayment, etc.