beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2015.01.15 2014고단1085

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

The defendant shall pay the agreed physical damages to C, who is an applicant for compensation. < Amended by Act No. 64,000>

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

“The Defendant 2014 Highest 1085” is a person who has engaged in the business of repair and lease with the trade name of “F”:

1. On March 18, 2013, at the above “F office located in Ansan-si G,” the victim H stated that “I will return the principal amount of the investment if it is invested in the for-time rental business to which I make within, and at the end of one month, it would return the principal amount of the investment.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any property at all due to bad credit standing at the time, and was willing to use the investment funds received from the victim for the return of investment funds to other investors and living expenses, etc., so even if receiving the investment funds from the victim, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to return the principal within a month.

Nevertheless, as above, the defendant deceiving the above victim and deceiving him from the above victim, the same year from the time of the above victim.

5. Until June 1, 200, a sum of KRW 105,000,000 was remitted to the Defendant’s national bank account (Account Number I) and, in such a manner, was remitted from five victims to a total of KRW 377,00,000,000, as stated in the attached List of Offenses.

"2014 Highest 1696"

2. On October 25, 2012, the Defendant stated that “When investing in the for-board rental business to be run in Korea, the Defendant would return the principal upon the expiration of two years of the contract period, the Defendant would return the principal to the Victim L.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any property at all due to bad credit standing at the time, and there was no intention or ability to return the principal after the expiration of the contract period, even if the Defendant received the investment from the victim, because the Defendant was willing to use the investment funds received from the victim to return the investment funds to other investors and living expenses.

Nevertheless, the defendant is the victim as above.