beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2014.07.15 2013고단2174

사기

Text

1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months;

2. The applicant for compensation shall be dismissed;

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On January 7, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) at the Changwon District Court on January 7, 201, and was provisionally released on May 30, 201 and the parole period expired on August 14, 201.

On October 201, 201, the Defendant: (a) the F entertainment tavern of the victim D’s operation in Seongdong-gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si; and (b) the victim, as a guest, had a little bit of dynamic hos; (c) was able to obtain money from the victim by deceptioning it.

Accordingly, the defendant has land in Jeju-do, has three vessels, and has re-influenced the victim.

However, at the Jeju National Credit Guarantee Foundation on December 12, 201, G real estate owned by the Defendant is merely a mere extent that the market price exceeds KRW 30 million. In addition, the right to collateral security was established for a total of KRW 115 million, and a ship owned by the Defendant was seized as a tax in arrears. The Defendant’s vessel was one H one, and the vessel was also set up a collateral security right of KRW 39 million from the Suhyup National Credit Guarantee Foundation on December 12, 201, and there was no real value because it was a provisional attachment of KRW 5,380,000,000 from the debt amount to KRW 95,50,000. On the contrary, the Defendant’s debt did not have any intent and ability to repay the debt even if it was lent money.

1. Around October 2011, the Defendant found the Foman's store located in Seongbuk-gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, and concluded a false statement that “The Defendant is obliged to pay the victim with the borrowed money, but the parent’s thickness does not have to be clear. Jeju-do land, and the vessel has three ships, and the vessel will be able to do so. It is believed that it would have been repaid.”

The Defendant, as such, deceiving the victim and deceiving him from the victim on November 30, 200,000 won from the account of I, a branch of the same year, and around December 20, of the same year.