beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.11 2017고단3887

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] On May 19, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution due to a violation of the Labor Standards Act at the Seoul Central District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 22, 2016.

[2] The Defendant entered into a contract with the victim on June 22, 2013 to lease the lease deposit amount of KRW 240 million between Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government apartment unit D and the victim-owned around June 22, 2013 and resided in the said apartment unit.

Around January 17, 2014, the Defendant obtained a loan from E Co., Ltd. during the term of the above lease agreement, and transferred the claim amounting to KRW 130 million, which exceeds the full amount of the refund claim remaining as to the above lease deposit, to E Co., Ltd. as security, and notified the victims thereof.

On April 17, 2015, the Defendant: (a) transferred the leased deposit repayment claim to E Co., Ltd. on G real estate located in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 17, 2015; and (b) even if the lease contract period expires, the Defendant said that the damaged party was unable to memory the fact that the leased deposit was transferred; (c) on the basis that the damaged party was “to return the leased deposit and the leased deposit to the injured party.”

As above, the Defendant did not interfere with the Defendant’s exercise of the right to defense of KRW 120 million in total, including KRW 10 million on April 22, 2015, KRW 1800,000,000,000,000 around June 2, 2015, from the victim, who violated the duty under the good faith principle that should notify the Defendant of the transfer of the right to claim the return of the leased deposit. As such, the Defendant partially corrected the date and amount of the return of the leased deposit in accordance with evidence.

(1) was delivered as the refund of the deposit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the first trial record;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. A real estate lease contract, a certificate of assignment of claims, and data on the current status of delivery of claims;