beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.06.17 2015고단987

사기

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

The defendant is a constructor who performs the construction of sidewalk block and road boundary stone, and the victim C was employed as a part of the above construction work and became aware of each other.

1. On March 201, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant: (a) admitted his/her husband and wife to the Domdong-dong, Seo-gu, Daejeon; (b) he/she lent money to the Domnnam University D; (c) he/she borrowed money to the Defendant during August 201; and (d) he/she will pay his/her interest to the Defendant 340,000 won per month.”

However, the Defendant had already paid a registration fee for his/her father, and at the time, there was a loan worth KRW 250 million, but the interest was not paid as well as the principal, but did not pay the wages of KRW 10 million to workers E, and there was a situation where there was a marina loan amounting to KRW 120 million in addition to agricultural cooperatives. Thus, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to pay the said loan by the deadline.

Around March 19, 2011, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 13.5 million from the Defendant’s office located in the above F.

2. On June 1, 2012, the Defendant stated that “Around the Seo-gu Daejeon District of Seo-gu, Daejeon, the Defendant borrowed money from the Defendant to pay off as the end of the day is insufficient to install a road boundary seat in Sejong City.”

However, as above, although the Defendant had loans worth KRW 250 million at the time, the Defendant did not pay not only the principal but also the interest, and did not pay the amount equivalent to KRW 10 million to workers E, and the Plaintiff was unable to repay the amount of KRW 120 million under the condition that Nonghyup M&A loan was not repaid. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the amount even if borrowing the money from the victim.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received two million won from the victim immediately.

(i) the evidence;