beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2013.12.11 2012고단4652

사기등

Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and for one year, for Defendant B.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Ⅰ. Defendant A (criminal record) was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for habitual fraud, etc. at the Daejeon District Court on November 22, 2007, and was released on December 24, 2008 and the parole period passed on May 6, 2009. On November 26, 2012, the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 16, 2013 by having been sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the same court.

[2012 Highest 4652]

1. Fraud;

A. A. A. On June 4, 2012, the Defendant stated in G legal party operated by the Defendant in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, that “If the Defendant lends money to the Victim E in a sudden manner, he would give it after this framework.” However, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the Victim, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the money. Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the Victim as above, obtained KRW 1.5 million from the Victim, i.e., from the Victim, e., from the Victim, and obtained from the Victim. 2) On June 8, 2012, the Defendant said at the above place that “The Defendant would pay the Victim E with the money borrowed before lending KRW 1.5 million as the value of the goods is needed.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to repay it.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and acquired 1,50,000 won from the victim, i.e., the victim.

B. Around June 5, 2012, the Defendant at the victim H stated that “The head who operates G Pool in Gangseo-gu F, who is the head who operates G Pool in Gangseo-gu, and our one time uses rice and eggs at the same time.” The Defendant supplied 20 km rice 40 g, and 60 g, thereby paying in cash if it is a week.”

However, even if the defendant is supplied with the above goods by the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to pay the price.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above.