beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2013.04.25 2013고단324

사기등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 18, 2013, the Defendant discovered and stolen the victim D cash 153,000 won, Nonghyup C, and one resident registration certificate, and one bus card, which contain one bus card, from the second floor female toilets of the building in Pyeongtaek-si C, at around the third floor of the building in Pyeongtaek-si.

2. On February 18, 2013, the Defendant, who violated the Fraud and the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, purchased bread in Pyeongtaek-si E on February 18, 2013, presented the cream card as if the victim’s name was owned by the Defendant.

However, the above Nonghyup Card was stolen as the above 1.1., and was not owned by the defendant, and the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by suggesting the stolen cream card as above, deprived of the victim’s pecuniary advantage equivalent to KRW 19,00, and used the stolen cream card from February 19, 2013 to February 16:42, 2013, including using the stolen cream card.

3. On February 18, 2013, the Defendant violated the Resident Registration Act: (a) sought to purchase cosmetics by using a stolen cream card owned by D as referred to in the foregoing paragraph 1; (b) but (c) the payment was not made upon D’s report on the loss of D.

Accordingly, the Defendant, like the above 1. The Defendant, committed a theft of D’s resident registration certificate, with the intention to cancel the report of loss.

On February 19, 2013, at around 15:50, the Defendant was requested to present an identification card from the employee G while filing an application for the cancellation of the report on the loss of the cryp card with the original agricultural cooperative located in Pyeongtaek-dong 100-1, Pyeongtaek-si.

Accordingly, the defendant presented D's resident registration certificate as the Defendant's resident registration certificate and used D's resident registration certificate unlawfully.

Summary of Evidence

1..