본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2016.06.17 2016고단96

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, from the date of the final judgment of this case, the defendants are above two years from the date of the final judgment.


Punishment of the crime

The Defendants find as married couple and wife, and start up at a house where E residing in Ha, Taenam-gun, Ma on Aug. 2014, 2014, and start up to E, “A’s small father is proceeding with the development of tin mountain located in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and introduce a person who borrowed the funds necessary for the permission. If the permission was granted for the development of tin mountain, it would be paid by adding 1.5 million won to 1.5 million won after two months after the considerable profit has occurred.” Since the permission was granted, the Defendants concluded that E is necessary for E to the victim F who is a child of E to cover expenses incurred in developing tin mountain.

In two months, permission was granted, and permission was granted to loan money to the same effect, and around that time, the victim was only the same.

However, the development of tinsan did not proceed at the time, and the Defendants did not have any property or income at the time, and did not delay the monthly rent of KRW 400,000 for three months, and even if they borrowed money from the injured party for the purpose of the development expenses of tinsan, they had the intention to use it for the cost of living, such as study expenses for children, payment of monthly rent, etc., and there was no intention or ability to repay it.

However, the Defendants were transferred KRW 30 million, including KRW 20 million from the injured party on August 11, 2014, and KRW 12 million on August 12, 2014, to the Saemaul Treasury Account in the name of Defendant A for the expenses of developing Daisan.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to attract the victim to receive the goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Entry of each part of the protocol of interrogation of suspect against the Defendants in each prosecutor’s office (including the E-statement)

1. Part concerning the statement F and E in the second police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Each instrument of borrowing money;