beta
Text
Defendant
F shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months, and imprisonment for one year and six months for defendant A.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[2012 Highest 1109, 2012 Highest 2012 Highest 2145] Defendants conspired with J to offer real estate owned by the victim K as security and to borrow money and acquire it.
On June 10, 201, the Defendants made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendants would make a payment of the purchase price of L real estate at the time of Kimpo-si, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, Seoul, by offering the victim K with a priority to purchase KRW 858 square meters of forests and fields located in L in G in Ginpo-si by offering it as a security of KRW 500 million, and by arranging the obligations of M in the face of the Defendant, Defendant A’s loaned and operated by Defendant A, Defendant M in the name of M Co., Ltd., Ltd., for purchase of KRW 2.4 billion of the remaining amount within one week.”
However, the Defendants did not have any intention or ability to pay the purchase price to the victim even if they borrowed the money after being provided the above real estate owned by the victim as collateral.
The Defendants had the victim set up a right to collateral security for the amount of KRW 150 million for Defendant A’s debt of KRW 100 million for Defendant A (P’s debt of KRW 100,000,000 for acquisition of P’s debt of KRW 50,000,000 for the P’s loan of KRW 50,000 for the P’s loan of KRW 10,000 for the P’s loan of KRW 50,000 for the forest land located in Kimpo-si, and acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 150,000 for KRW
[2012 Highest 2460] Defendant A stated that “The victim S will pay money without any mold if he/she lends money because he/she had a place of money after a week,” at the R Office of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Q building 810 Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., the victim S., “I would pay money without any molding.”
However, the Defendant, without any particular property at the time, has reached approximately KRW 50 million, and around August 2007, the Defendant did not have any profit from the cosmetic, which was run by the manufacturer and distributor of cosmetics. Therefore, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to repay it.
Nevertheless, the Defendant made such a false statement to the victim.