beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.09.14 2016고단5944

사기

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The gist of the facts charged was that the Defendant, who was the actual representative of “B”, was proceeding with the construction of a neighboring commercial building in Incheon Vindication-gun, Incheon, from May 2012.

1. On August 2012, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant would pay the cost of installation at the F site within 15 days after the completion of the construction of the facility at the F site” to D representative E operating building equipment business at the construction site at the middle of the same month.

However, the Defendant, upon receiving a contract for the said new construction from the owner G, received the construction cost of KRW 185 million in cash and KRW 2,000,000 from the owner of the building, and KRW 12,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 from Y and 2 lots. On May 18, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around J bank established a collateral security right of KRW 2,30,000,00 in total with a third party until August 22, 2012; (b) on August 23, 2012, it was difficult for the Defendant to dispose of the said I building and pay the construction cost to K as a substitute for the construction cost; and (c) there was no intention or ability to pay the construction cost to the victim merely because there was any specific obligation equivalent to KRW 170,00,000,00 for national taxes.

Ultimately, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as such; (b) had the victim engage in the installation work from August 30, 2012 to September 20, 2012; and (c) did not pay an amount equivalent to KRW 18 million, thereby acquiring pecuniary benefits equivalent to the said amount.

2. On August 2012, 2012, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving L representative M in the same manner as paragraph (1) at the same place as that of paragraph (1); (b) had M seal construction work from August 22, 2012 to September 20, 2012; and (c) did not pay an amount equivalent to KRW 29 million; and (d) acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to that amount.

3. The Defendant, in August 2012, by deceiving N RepresentativeO in the same manner as paragraph 1, at the same place as that of paragraph 1, and letO perform the disaster prevention work from August 22, 2012 to September 30, 2012, even if the Defendant, at the same time as that of paragraph 1, has the N RepresentativeO perform the disaster prevention work.