beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.14 2016고합455

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant is the actual operator of D (hereinafter “D”) established for the purpose of real estate consulting, etc., and E is the representative director of D, and F, G, and H (hereinafter “F, etc.”) is the actual operator and employees of F, G, and H (hereinafter “I”) of F, and J are the auditors of K (hereinafter “K”).

The Defendant entered into a contract with D in relation to the Jung-gu L Building in Seoul, with a false content that D would purchase L Building in total amount of KRW 233 billion, and entered into a contract with I and K on September 2014 to delegate the authority to select construction works related to the removal and remodeling of L Building. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25079, Sep. 10, 2014>

Afterward, the defendant had I and K to see the company that will be subcontracted with the removal of the L building through E, and had I and K acquire money from the subcontractor by borrowing the above removal subcontract from the subcontractor.

2. Around December 4, 2014, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) against the victim M in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (based on E and F, etc.) concluded a service contract with the victim to remove the L building at the victim’s office operated by the victim M in the fourth floor of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government NF building to give a subcontract to the victim, the Defendant would allow the victim to first borrow KRW 300 million first and immediately start the removal work within one month, and return the above KRW 300 million at the time of advance payment.

“A false statement” was made.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any authority over the L Building since there was no means to conclude a contract to purchase the L Building, and there was no fund to purchase the L Building or to execute the above removal works, and even if the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged party, the Defendant was willing to subcontract the removal works of the L Building to the victim.