beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.01.07 2015고단1198

사기등

Text

The defendant shall be sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for each crime set forth in paragraphs 1 through 5, 9, and 10 of the judgment of the court, and the defendant shall be sentenced to 6 to 8 of the judgment of the court.

Reasons

(b) has no capacity;

On the same day, the defendant received the amount of KRW 10 million from the damaged person as the borrowed money and acquired it by fraud.

3. On April 2012, the Defendant: (a) obtained a request for a loan equivalent to KRW 20 million from L from L on the Spancheon-gun Spancheon-gun Span-gun Sungwon on the ground that the Defendant was in custody of L’s certificate of personal seal impression, resident registration, resident registration transcript, resident registration abstract, family relation certificate, copy of passbook, copy of passbook, driver’s license, and power of delegation; and (b) purchased a heavy vehicle with a loan from L’s modern capital, and then intended to sell it.

A. On April 9, 2012, the Defendant: (a) entered “L”, “L”, “Ncheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, N(A)”, and “L” in the settlement column, using a string tool, in the office of the 7th floor of the 1721-9 floor of the 17th floor of the building in the original city, the office of the 7th floor of the 17th floor of the building; and (b) entered “L” into the customer information column by using the string tool; and (c) entered “L” in advance.

L’s painting was stamped.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a copy of the application for the modern loan of L's name, which is a private document related to rights and obligations.

B. The Defendant, at the same time and place as in the preceding paragraph, issued a forged application form as a document in which it was duly prepared, and exercised the same as in the preceding paragraph, to the employees of the modern branch of the Republic of Korea Capital without knowing the forgery.

(c)

The fraud accused made a false statement to the employees of the said modern capital branch, whose name is unknown at the above time and place as above, stating that “the Defendant has obtained L’s permission to borrow the borrowed loan in the name of L, because there was a permission to do so.”

However, the defendant has received the above documents from L.