beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.11.14 2014고정863

사기

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

In fact, even if the Defendant received a bid deposit from the victim, the Defendant made a false statement that “In spite of the absence of the intent or ability to receive a successful bid of the “Ycheon-gu D apartment 602 Dong 501, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seocheon-gu, 501” in the victim’s name, the Defendant received one cashier’s check from the Incheon Incheon District Court of Bank, which is located in the Nam-gu, Incheon, Incheon, Seoul, and then acquired one cashier’s check from the victim to the victim E on April 9, 2012, that “I will receive a successful bid of the apartment without the face of the seal imprint, seal impression, identification card, and bid deposit.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. Statement made by witnesses G in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement No. H and E in the interrogation protocol of the second prosecutor's office against the accused;

1. The investigation report (Confirmation of the reported fact, such as the International Lien Act) (the defendant and his defense counsel) asserts that there was no fact that the defendant did not agree that the defendant would receive a successful bid in the name of the victim with respect to the D Apartment 602 Dong 501, and that the defendant would make a request for purchase in the name of the defendant from the beginning. However, according to the records, the defendant stated that the D Apartment 602 Dong 501 was purchased at his own funds with respect to the above D Apartment 601, the above 501 stated that he was a debtor in the above auction procedure and the owner's name, but that the above statement was false and completed a false lease contract at the request of the J, and reversed the statement that he made a request for distribution as a lessee at the auction procedure of this case.

In addition, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with E on July 11, 201 with regard to the foregoing D Apartment 602 Dong 502, and actually resided in the above 502 unit, but on September 27, 2011, reported the domestic domicile of the instant D Apartment 602 Dong 501, and on the same day, reported the right as a lessee at the auction procedure of this case.