beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2012.11.08 2012고정584

사기미수

Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

If the Defendants did not pay each of the above fines, KRW 50,00.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A concluded a lease contract with a deposit amount of KRW 300 million on a pharmacy building in Si, Gun, Si, Gun-si, D, and entered into a contract with F to receive KRW 135 million on premium, while operating a pharmacy, and entered into a contract with F to acquire or transfer the rights of the above pharmacy.

From August 17, 201, the Defendants issued 100,000 won cashier's checks to H, who are employees of D, a corporation in Gunsan City, issued 300,000 won cashier's checks to D, as the Defendants refused to refund 300,000 won of the deposit deposit to F and demanded 30,000 won of the penalty.

After receiving the refund of KRW 300 million, the Defendants reported false theft or loss of a check at the Peacedong Branch of the Korean Bank, the issuing bank, and attempted to obtain a public summons on a check and a judgment of nullification on August 23, 201 on the ground that the last holder of the said check was lost, upon receiving a judgment of nullification from the above court, the Defendants attempted to obtain property benefits equivalent to the amount of the check upon receiving a judgment of nullification from the above court. However, D Co., Ltd failed to be deemed as having failed to appear on the date of the request for the public summons against the national bank, and thus, failed to achieve such intent.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ partial statement

1. Part of the protocol concerning the interrogation of suspect against the Defendants

1. Statement of the police statement to I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a accident report or a public summons report;

1. Articles 352, 347 (1), and 30 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the argument of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the reasoning for sentencing, the Defendants are not obligated to pay a penalty to D, and thus, the check is a preparatory measure to prevent the use of the check by D from being issued for the purpose of returning the deposit instead of the intent to pay the check money.