logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.08.11 2017고단1811
사기
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is a person who invested in Youngcheon-si C (State)D and operated the said company with E, F, etc. in Youngcheon-si.

On July 2012, the Defendant: (a) set up a first priority mortgage on July 20, 2012 on the land and buildings owned by the said company (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and on July 20, 2012, the Defendant borrowed KRW 1.260 million from LL, KRW 150 million from L, and KRW 150 million from H as security each; and (b) set up a second priority mortgage on the said real estate by the victim and H on August 16, 2012.

Around October 2012, the Defendant attempted to obtain more loans by converting Doldong Dolin into another financial institution, such as the one-class security right holder of the first priority in return of the investment deposit from the said H, the Defendant continued to obtain more loans from around November 18, 2012, and the said H’s pressure to return the investment deposit continued, the Defendant borrowed KRW 150 million from the J individual, the first branch of the Gyeongsan District I, which was the first branch of the Gyeongsan District, at KRW 150 million, from the victim, etc. who was already established in the said real estate, and set up a second priority mortgage to J.

Around November 22, 2012, the Defendant: (a) at L coffee stores located in Daegu Suwon-gu, K, the Defendant: (b) made a loan from a financial institution other than Doldong-gu, as above; and (c) planned to cancel the second priority mortgage of the victim’s name in order to borrow bonds of KRW 150 million from J; (d) however, the Defendant concealed it; and (e) the victim’s intent to obtain a loan from a bank with a high priority rate of interest on the loans that would have been received in the existing real estate as collateral, and (e) the victim would first obtain a loan from another bank if the Defendant rescinded the second priority mortgage and then would make repayment of the loan borrowed from the other bank or re-establish it in the second priority order.

arrow