대구지방법원 안동지원 2017.08.25 2016고단401



1. The punishment of the defendant shall be determined by six months;

2. Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final;


Punishment of the crime

1. On December 27, 2009, the Defendant: (a) borrowed KRW 20 million from the F that actually operates the E fishing place 140,000 square meters in Ansan-si D on December 27, 2009, to allow the victim C to receive a contract for work on the face of the loan; and (b) paid by March 31, 2010 by December 31, 201.

“The meaning of “.......”

However, at the time of fact, F did not decide to receive the above construction from the victim, and the defendant thought that the victim would use the money borrowed from the victim as personal expenses in the situation where the victim bears a debt of one billion won or more, so even if he borrowed the money from the victim, the victim could be awarded a contract for the booming work, or the victim did not have any intention or ability to pay the money on the date agreed to by the victim.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 2 million in cash from the damaged party, and received the remittance of KRW 18 million from the new bank account in the name of the Defendant on December 29, 200 to the new bank account in the name of the Defendant.

2. On January 25, 2010, the Defendant, at the place indicated in paragraph (1) on January 23, 2010, was entitled to rebates if the Defendant was selected from I to engage in the H creation work in Ansan-si, and the Defendant would be entitled to receive rebates if he/she borrowed five million won as expenses. In addition, the Defendant would be entitled to receive rebates until February 10, 2010.

“The meaning of “.......”

However, at the time, the Defendant did not specifically decide on the implementation of the H business from F due to the lack of any investor in the H business, and the Defendant was at the time of having been liable for a debt exceeding one billion won, so even if she borrowed money from the damaged party, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to make rebates to the injured party or to pay the money on the agreed date.

The Defendant is the victim.