beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.05 2017고단7525

사기

Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months, and for one year and six months, respectively.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on September 13, 2012, and was released on September 30, 2013 in Seoul Southern Prison on the execution of the sentence, and the period expired on December 23, 2013. On August 18, 2016, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced one year of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court and the judgment on October 19, 2016 became final and conclusive.

The Defendants are willing to acquire money by introducing projects to the effect that they have exclusive rights to the D market redevelopment project from the injured party, and Defendant A has the exclusive business rights for the D market reconstruction project that Defendant B is the representative director (hereinafter “E”) around May 2015.

Around May 21, 2015, the Defendants made a false statement to the effect that “The principal of the investment after re-building shall be repaid 150% after six months after the re-building, 50% after the lapse of six months, and 20% of the shares shall be paid if the Defendants continue to participate in the re-building project and participate in the re-building project.”

However, in fact, Defendant B’s management of the D market after obtaining permission from the head of Seoul Special Metropolitan City on July 1978 with the permission to open the D market. On December 1980, Defendant B transferred the management right to the D market committee around the D market, and the current owner is merely a sectional owner, and there was no special authority to execute the D market reconstruction or to exclusively implement the D market, and there was no particular property or income. Therefore, even if the Defendants borrowed money from the damaged party, the Defendants did not have any intention or ability to commence the reconstruction project or to pay the money.

On May 22, 2015, the Defendants conspired to induce the victim, thereby deceiving the victim.