logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.17 2015노467
사기미수등
Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In accordance with the prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles in civil litigation related to attempted fraud, the Defendant did not have the claim of KRW 450 million against E. Thus, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land 250 square meters on the ground of payment in kind to E, and the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land 250 million on the ground of payment in kind to E, and filed a preliminary appeal for the loan claim of KRW 250,000,000,000, which is dissatisfied with the dismissal judgment, and

(B) The defendant was present as a witness of the prosecuted case, such as the defendant's accusation against E, and "H below the company where the witness is the representative director."

The witness was awarded KRW 354,400,000 to the defendant as a corporate passbook, but the defendant was required to use at the last time and deposited into the corporate passbook. The defendant continued to withdraw thereafter.

5. 12.12. 193.5 billion won has been withdrawn and all of 3.554 million won have been withdrawn.

The testimony " shall be deemed to be the testimony that the defendant made E to withdraw the money in the account of the passbook itself, and since there was a need to prove the fact of payment of the purchase price for the land 175 square meters in the civil and criminal litigation at the time, the defendant should be deemed to have made a false testimony that H's corporate account itself had E. Even if the defendant paid to E the purport of the defendant's testimony to the effect that he paid KRW 354,440 million in the H account, the defendant did not have any fact of paying KRW 354,440,00 to E, and the defendant's testimony is false testimony.

(C) There was no fact that the Defendant paid KRW 354 million to E with the price for the land of this case 175 square meters, or that E recognized KRW 175 million to the Defendant in return for the said money.

arrow