beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.11.02 2017고정1110

사기

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 13, 2016, the Defendant against the victim C by phone call to the victim C, “The Defendant has a cell phone repair store located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, which is an E mobile phone repair store, after which he/she purchases all of his/her phone values. The Defendant reported the liquid test of the items he/she possessed and paid the price immediately.

“.....”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the price even if he was given a opon by the injured person.

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; and (b) obtained the issuance of the Chapter 61 of the Phone-Son EL (market price of KRW 3,467,00) from the injured party; and (c) fraudulently acquired the victim.

2. Fraud against victim F;

A. On February 7, 2016, the Defendant told the Victim F to the effect that “The Defendant sent the Victim F with two phone calls from 4:00 p.m. to the branch located in Incheon Airport between 4:00 p.m. to 6:0 p.m..., I wish to make the phone payments within one week.”

However, the defendant did not have an intention or ability to pay the price even if the victim delivered a phiphone.

Nevertheless, the Defendant deceiving the victim as above and caused the victim to take part in the departure of the Incheon Airport from the Republic of Korea on 16:00 of the same day, and then acquired two mobile phones (on 6S 64G 1st, 16G 1st, 16G 1st, 167 1st, 709,800 won).

B. On February 2016, the Defendant, by telephone, sold opphones to a police officer in the middle of February 2016, because he/she could sell opphones in China.

The sales can be made immediately in China, and the sales price will be made within one week.

“.....”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the price even if he received the mobile phone from the damaged person.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and caused the victim to do so on March 2016.