사기등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
The defendant pays 1,5930,000 won to the applicant D.
Punishment of the crime
"2016 Highest 459"
1. Fraud;
A. On February 15, 2013, the Defendant: (a) on February 15, 2013, the victim E seeking housing construction work in the G Building Office located in the G Building Office in the Gangseo-gun F, Gangwon-do, Incheon, requires construction cost of KRW 155,00,000; and (b) on the face of this, the construction work will be completed by July 30, 2013.
The phrase “ makes a false statement.”
However, the fact is that the G Building Office operated by the Defendant at the time was in excess of its obligation and was operated in such a way as to prevent the subcontractor from returning from paying the construction price under the circumstances where it is difficult for the subcontractor to pay the construction price. Therefore, even if the Defendant received the construction price from the injured party, the Defendant only tried to use it in preventing such return and did not have the intention or ability to complete the construction work
The Defendant received a total of KRW 150 million from February 15, 2013 to February 2, 2014, from the damaged party, via a national bank account, etc. in the name of G construction office, under the pretext of construction cost, for a total of five times.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.
B. On March 2, 2013, the Defendant, on March 2, 2013, completed the construction work without molding until June 30, 2013, to the victim D who seeks to construct housing in the G Building Office located in the Gangseo-gun F, Gangwon-do, Gangwon-do, in the G Building Office, “The construction cost of KRW 124,80,000 is required.”
The phrase “ makes a false statement.”
However, the fact is that the G Building Office operated by the Defendant at the time was in excess of its obligation and was operated in such a way as to prevent the subcontractor from returning from paying the construction price under the circumstances where it is difficult for the subcontractor to pay the construction price. Therefore, even if the Defendant received the construction price from the injured party, the Defendant only tried to use it in preventing such return and did not have the intention or ability to complete the construction work
The defendant belongs to this.