logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.08 2017노4151
사기등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) D and victim E provided real estate, etc. for the purpose of securing the existing obligation of the defendant company, and the defendant set up a collateral with the consent of D and victim E with the establishment of a collateral security right with the establishment of related documents, etc., so the defendant has no intention of fraud or occupational breach of trust.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit, since the Defendant’s intent to commit fraud or occupational breach of trust can be acknowledged.

A. The Defendant failed to pay approximately KRW 200 million for the interior work cost, which occurred from April 2013 to January 2014. From 2013 to 2015, the Defendant was in an economic difficult situation (Evidence No. 350-352, 355). (b) In this situation, D and the Victim E decided to make an investment in the Defendant while engaging in convenience stores and POS businesses together with the Defendant, but the Defendant intended to provide real estate due to lack of cash.

(c)

In doing so, D made a statement at an investigative agency to the effect that “the real estate was not provided to secure the Defendant’s existing obligation, but to lend funds necessary for the future business” (Evidence Record 221, 281-282, 316). The victim E also made a statement to the same effect at an investigative agency (Evidence Record 316 pages).

In fact, regarding AB 6025 on January 10, 2013 with respect to each of the instant crimes, the right to collateral security was established on January 10, 2013 with respect to No. 6025 owned by the victim E (Evidence No. 23 pages). This is not for securing the Defendant’s existing obligation, but for receiving machinery necessary for the instant business that D, victim E, and the Defendant intended to proceed together (Evidence No. 23).

arrow