beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2015.11.26 2015고단3556

사기

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Around the end of January 2014, the Defendant against the victim C: “Around March 15, 2014, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Office intended to publicly announce and implement the repair works of Han River bridge; and Hyundai Construction and Hyundai Industrial Development will be entrusted with the said construction works. In modern construction, the Defendant may receive KRW 9 million a monthly rent. If the value of one of the middle and middle-aged ships is KRW 30 million, and the transport and contact costs are up to KRW 50 million,000 to KRW 60,000,000,000,000 to KRW 5 million,000,000,000,000,000, which is the sales contract deposit, is loaned from the new lease to the victim C; and the remainder is appropriated from May 15, 2014 to receive the rent from around May 2014.”

However, the defendant did not think that he would use the above money for the cost of living, but did not think that he would purchase or lease the above money, and there was no other property and there was no intention or ability to pay the money to the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 4.3 million in total from the victim, including KRW 2.7 million around February 7, 2014, KRW 300,000 around August of the same month, and KRW 1.3 million around 10,000 around the same month.

2. Fraud against victim D;

A. On March 5, 2014, the Defendant entered into a false statement on February 13, 2014, stating that “B is the representative director of the E Company and the middle Dong high school, and the victim’s living together entered into a contract so that the F Company may deliver all valves products at construction sites of G apartment 2,404 at the Gyeonggi-si G apartment 2,404.”

However, the defendant thought that he will use the above money for the cost of living, but did not think that he would properly proceed with the above supply contract, and there was no intention or ability to pay the money to the victim without any property.

As above, the Defendant deceivings the victim, and thereby deceivings the victim, on March 5, 2014.