logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.05 2017고정1615
사기
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On January 19, 2009, the Defendant purchased the store Nos. 101 and 109 of the above building from the victim E in the general restaurant “D” located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si, and concluded a sales contract with the victim in lieu of the Defendant’s succession to the collateral security liability of KRW 120 million and KRW 60 million,000,000,000 in the above store, and the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the Defendant to pay only the remaining KRW 20,000,000 in lieu of the Defendant’s succession to the collateral security liability of each of the above stores. Even if the Defendant received the ownership of each of the above stores from the victim at the time, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the purchase price to the victim even if he did not have the intent or ability to pay the purchase price even if he received the ownership of each of

“False speech was made to the effect that it was “.”

The defendant acquired the ownership of each of the above stores on January 21, 2009 from the injured party and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Each police statement made to E and F;

1. A complaint, a real estate transaction contract, and a certified copy of registry;

1. Each loan certificate, receipt, loan transaction agreement, written repayment plan, cash loan certificate, cash deposit certificate, and confirmation certificate [the following circumstances known by the evidence of the above evidence, i.e., ① the Defendant was liable for debts exceeding KRW 50,000 in excess of KRW 50,00 from the bond company, etc. with bad credit standing at the time of the conclusion of the sales contract on each of the above stores, and the Defendant’s restaurant operated was immediately immediately before the closure due to lack of operating funds. Thus, even if the ownership was acquired from the damaged party and the ownership was transferred, it was practically impossible for the Defendant to obtain a loan of KRW 20,00 in the bank as security or to normally take over the obligation of collateral security at each of the above stores. ② The Defendant actually received the ownership of each of

arrow