beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.25 2018고단3035

사기등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Fraud;

A. On December 3, 2015, the Defendant was false to the effect that, at the Defendant’s office located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, 300 million won, the Defendant changed the victim C into KRW 300 million as a deposit for sales agency, for the purpose of giving the right to vicariously sell approximately KRW 6,800 of the shop buildings in neighboring neighborhood living facilities constructed by the Seoul Songpa-gu apartment house improvement project.

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any authority or ability with regard to the right to sell the above commercial building, and even if he received money from the injured party as the deposit money for the commercial building, he thought that it will be used for the personal purpose unrelated to the sale agency.

On December 3, 2015, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; and (b) received the Defendant’s transfer of KRW 15 million to the post office account (F) account in the name of the Defendant E on December 3, 2015; and (c) from that time received a total of KRW 300,000,000 from that time to April 26, 2016, as shown in the attached list of crimes (1) as a sale deposit.

B. Around May 17, 2016, the Defendant of KRW 200 million, in the name of the acquisition price of shares, concluded that “The Defendant, at the Defendant’s seat office located in the 20th floor of H building near Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, had 100% (180,000 shares) of the Plaintiff’s shares in the L-gu L-gu L-gu L-gu L-gu L-gu L-gu L-gu L-gu L-gu L-W-gu L-W-gu L-W-gu, transfer 20% of the shares (36,000 shares) to KRW 54,000 (50,000 shares) (36,000 shares) and the acquisition price

However, in fact, the defendant did not hold the shares of the Corporation I and entered into a contract for acquisition of shares from the J on October 2013 before it entered into such contract and did not pay the price. Therefore, there was no intention or ability to transfer the shares to the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim, was the post office account under the above E on May 17, 2016, under the name of the acquisition price of shares.