beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.04.26 2016고단540

사기등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

"2016 Highest 540 "

1. The Defendant was on duty in Ansan-si, a member-gu, Seoul 201, as a seller of a heavy vehicle, and the victim E is a person who operates the said D.

The Defendant, while working as a distributor of used vehicles in D, sold vehicles on his own account, and traded in the name of a business operator in D for convenience and paid a certain amount to the victim as a fee.

On February 3, 2014, the Defendant, at the above D office, provided that “The Defendant borrowed money immediately after the purchase and sale of used vehicles to the victim.”

However, from the end of 2013, the Defendant was in a situation where it is economically difficult to recover the claim that was lent to others, and even if he purchased and sold a vehicle with money borrowed from the damaged party, he/she did not have any intent or ability to repay the money even if he/she borrowed money from the damaged party, even if he/she borrowed money from the damaged party.

As above, the defendant was employed by the defendant from the injured party on February 7, 2014 when he/she belonged to the victim.

In addition, from around that time to March 13, 2015, a total of KRW 74.5 million was transferred to an enterprise bank account (G) in the name of F, and acquired it by remittance, including a total of KRW 74.5 million through a total of seven times, as shown in the annexed Crime List, from around that time.

Defendant 2, "2016 Highest 1341", Defendant 2 was a person who was working for a middle and high-speed motor vehicle from "I within H in Ansan-si."

2. The Defendant, on April 5, 2015, purchased the said vehicle at KRW 43 million on December 5, 2014 by the victim J at the said “I” office at the time of the lower end of April 2015, the market price of the said vehicle seems to be equivalent to the said amount.

On May 2015, the repair of the above vehicle was entrusted to the Defendant, and the repair of the said vehicle was completed, and the said vehicle was stored for the victim.

Around that time, the Defendant was the Defendant’s name-free lending business operator.