사기등
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Punishment of the crime
5859 Decided 2012
1. On September 29, 2010, the Defendant made a statement to the effect that, at the D University located in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu Seoul, the victim E, “A is the representative of the F University of the United States of America, and there is no flight charge from PGA to enter into a contract for PGA with the U.S. PGA. In order to enter into a contract for the MOU., the Defendant borrowed the aviation fee to the effect that the Defendant would immediately pay it with the female.”
However, in fact, the defendant is not the representative of the U.S. F university, but rather the representative of the U.S. university, and there was little possibility to enter into the PGA and MOU contract with the above university, and at the time, there was a debt of KRW 70 million, but there was no intention or ability to repay the debt even if it was borrowed from the victim because there was no particular property or income.
On September 26, 2010, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim pay the U.S. flight fee of KRW 1,782,800 to the victim, thereby gaining financial benefits equivalent to the same amount.
2. On October 8, 2010, the Defendant expressed to the effect that “The money is needed to enter into a U.S. PG and MU contract with the victim” at a very early place on October 8, 2010 for the Defendant’s fraud, “on the face of a credit card, he/she will prepare and use money via the card-based tin and pay for the card price.”
However, as stated in Paragraph 1, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the card price even if he borrowed and used the card from the victim.
The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received a credit card under the husband’s name from the victim, and then settled KRW 2.5 million from G computer on October 8, 2010, thereby gaining financial benefits equivalent to the same amount.
2013 High Court Decision 201Da3919
3. The Defendant, who violated the effect of compulsory execution against real estate, was delinquent in leasing and using the above real estate from I, the owner of the Gangnam-gu Seoul H building 901.
Accordingly, I is the Seoul Central District Court on September 22, 201.