beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.10.29 2014노560

사기등

Text

The judgment below

Among them, the part of innocence on the forgery of private documents and the uttering of private investigation documents shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding person);

A. As to fraud, the Defendant did not use 40 million won as a security deposit from the victim G to purchase a factory site, but purchased land in Gangwon-do or used it individually for the Defendant’s management of the company.

Therefore, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, even if the defendant received money from the beginning, he can be sufficiently recognized that he had obtained money by deceiving the victim without the intention or ability to listen to the future factory, but the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous.

B. As to the fabrication of private documents and the uttering of a falsified private document, G did not have any reason to invest KRW 100 million with a certain amount of money to be invested, and there was no reason to make investments in D Co., Ltd. with no real value. Since the Defendant maintained G’s seal imprint, certificate of personal seal impression, and resident registration certificate, the Defendant could use G’s seal imprint and certificate of personal seal impression without consent. The G’s statement on the reasons why the certificate was issued two times in relation to the certificate of personal seal impression attached to

Therefore, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, although it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant used the certificate under the name of G, the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged.

2. The summary of the facts charged is a person who operated D Co., Ltd. (Co., Ltd. E before the mutual change; hereinafter “D”) established for the purpose of distributing and selling agricultural products, etc.

On January 2012, the fraud defendant purchased the site for factory in the area where he/she cultivated 5 years of age to the victim G(55) in the D office located in the third floor of the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F building, and tried to establish an agricultural product processing factory.

It is the test to lease the factory to the party.