logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.06.19 2017노8473
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The statements made by the victim of the gist of the grounds for appeal are consistent and reliable, and the defendant had no ability to pay the purchase price as at the time of purchase of the apartment in this case as a bad credit standing from around 2010.

Therefore, the Defendant borrowed the name of the victim without the intention or ability to transfer the registered name or pay the interest on the loan, purchased the apartment of this case, and charged the victim with the interest on arrears.

2. The defendant's original victim's transfer of the registered name of the apartment of this case to the original victim within three months;

However, at the time, the defendant was not capable of purchasing the apartment of this case as the bad credit standing.

However, the following circumstances revealed through the records of this case, namely, ① the Defendant, after the purchase of the apartment of this case, changed the victim to move the registration in his/her father’s name to June 2013. The victim also consented thereto. ② The Defendant sold the apartment of this case to G around March 2013 and arranged the registration in the name of the victim by selling it to his/her father because it is difficult for his/her father to transfer the registration of the apartment of this case in his/her father’s name. ③ around August 2013, he/she requested G to sell the apartment of this case; ③ was failed to sell the apartment of this case’s around August 2013; and the Defendant was delayed until August 26, 2013.

Comprehensively taking account of the fact that the Defendant paid the interest on loans (excluding the interest on loans for two months that the victim paid on behalf of the victim) during the four-month period, and thereafter paid the interest on loans each month until May 26, 2014, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that the Defendant had the intention to acquire the apartment of this case by lending the name of the victim without the intent to transfer the registration of the victim at the time of the purchase of the apartment of this case or to pay the interest on the loan, such as having the victim purchase the apartment of this case and bear

It is insufficient to recognize it.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3...

arrow