logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.09.12 2016고단1679
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On October 28, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten-month imprisonment for fraud at the Chuncheon District Court on October 28, 2015, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 5, 2015, and is currently under suspended sentence.

[Criminal Facts]

1. The defendant, on around 2006, transferred the right of sale to the victims by using the G apartment (D operator, who entered into a housing guarantee contract, housing trust contract, and housing sale guarantee contract, and constructed by H) in eight lots, including the M&F from the D representative director E, to the victims of the damage caused by the use of the G apartment (the apartment constructed by the D operator, entering into a housing trust contract, housing sale trust contract, and housing sale guarantee contract, and the apartment constructed by H).

The author tried to acquire money by fraud.

On May 7, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim K (the 34 years of age) at the “J Authorized Brokerage Office” located in Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul, stating that “The profitability-friendly apartment house has come to be sold at lots, now the enforcement company now has come to close up with the original selling price, and at the latest, the previous registration is made by the end of 2014, but the previous registration is made at the end of 102 Dong 304, 100,000,000,000 won.”

However, on May 29, 2009, H filed a lawsuit against D with respect to the above apartment, seeking the payment of the construction cost of approximately KRW 21.6 billion against D and D, and the Seoul Central District Court sentenced D to jointly and severally pay KRW 21.1 billion to H on September 1, 2010. On October 25, 2011, the Seoul High Court rendered a decision dismissing D's appeal. In addition, the above apartment was a situation where the ownership preservation, etc. was made in the name of the Housing Guarantee as of October 12, 2007 under the Housing Trust Contract concluded with D, and the sales contract held by the Defendant was not deposited in the designated account recognized by the Corporation and the Housing Guarantee for D, but the representative of D's investment money.

arrow