logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.11.28 2013고단332
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Around March 16, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C’s house located in Ansan-si D 201, stating that “If it is urgently required to pay the money, the Defendant will use it only for one year, and make payment by March 16, 2012,” at the victim C’s house located in Ansan-si D 201.

However, at the time, the defendant borrowed money from other persons, but there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the complainant with no special property.

The Defendant, as such, was accused of the victim and was given eight million won from the victim’s seat.

2. On August 16, 2011, the Defendant: (a) provided that the Defendant borrowed money from the victim at the above place; (b) provided that there is no money; (c) that the Defendant would repay the interest and principal to the victim up to December 31, 201, while there is no money; and (d) that the Defendant would borrow money from E to pay the principal by December 31, 201.

However, the fact, however, has already been borrowed money from other persons, and there was no intention or ability to repay the above money even if there was no special property.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim guarantee to borrow KRW 10 million from the above E, thereby acquiring pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount.

3. Around October 25, 2011, the Defendant stated that “the Defendant borrowed money to the victim at the same place as above,” but the victim did not have any money,” and that “the Defendant would pay money without the mold if the Plaintiff borrowed money from the bond company to him/her if he/she borrowed money from the bond company to him/her.”

However, the defendant had already been able to borrow more money from the bond company because he had already borrowed money from the bond company, so that he had requested the above money to the victim, and there is no further awareness.

arrow