beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.01.25 2018고단4921

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around January 2013, the Defendant, “D” operated by the Victim C in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, operated a construction company “E from Dongducheon-si.” Construction is being conducted in Seosan F and Taean-si G, etc.

However, on June 3, 2011, the Defendant was in a situation in which he/she lost in a lawsuit claiming entry in a defaulters’ list and was recorded in the defaulters’ list. From August 16, 2010 to August 31, 2010, the Defendant’s employees H and I’s total wages of KRW 2,145,000, and from June 15, 2012 to August 20, 2012, the Defendant was unable to pay the wages of KRW 3,60,000 employed by the employeeJ from June 15, 201 to August 20, 2012. Therefore, even if the Defendant was supplied with construction materials from the victim, there was no intention or ability to pay the price within the agreed date.

The Defendant, from January 22, 2013 to May 30, 2013, received building materials equivalent to KRW 5,255,800 from the victim to the front site of the K Apartment, from February 14, 2013 to June 10, 2013, and received building materials equivalent to KRW 21,486,00 from February 14, 2013 to June 25, 2013, respectively from March 15, 2013 to May 25, 2013.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received property equivalent to 34,409,300 won in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. A copy of a trading statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports [Attachment of Materials concerning Suspect's ability to repay];

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that there was no record of punishment for fraud before this case, the fact that the criminal intent of defraudation seems to be weak, and the fact that the mistake is recognized and reflected, etc.);