logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2012.11.22 2012고단3084
사기
Text

The punishment of the accused shall be set forth in six months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 18, 2011, the Defendant was performing the construction of the new building in Gwangju-gu D ground by being awarded a contract with the owner C for KRW 22,390,000,000 for the construction of the new building in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu. On May 24, 2011, the Defendant concluded that, in a coffee shop where the trade name located in the Gwangju-gu Standing District is unknown, he subcontracted part of the said new construction work to the victim E, and that, in turn, he would pay in advance the amount of KRW 20,000 as advance payment during the following week by taking charge of reinforced concrete, small construction sites, waterproof, and drone construction works.

However, at that time, the Defendant borrowed a bond of KRW 140,000,000 from the KRW 30,000 per month to operate a restaurant by borrowing the loan of KRW 100,000,000 per month and delayed due to the lack of funds for the Gel construction, and thus, the Defendant used KRW 50,000,000 received from the said owner C as the above restaurant operating expenses, Gel construction expenses, and personal expenses. Even if the owner received additional construction expenses from the said owner C, the Defendant was thought to use the said restaurant operating expenses, and thus, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the construction expenses in accordance with the progress and progress of the construction works even if the owner gave the subcontract to the victim.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim complete the construction of reinforced concrete in an amount equivalent to KRW 65 million during the construction of the said construction until the police officer during September 2011, and did not pay KRW 35 million, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding C;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A copy of each letter of commitment and a copy of each letter of commitment.

arrow