beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for each of the crimes of fraud in the case of [2014 Highest 6091] decision A, 2014 Highest 6082 decided.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
On April 27, 2012, A was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud at the Incheon District Court, and two years of suspended execution, which became final and conclusive on May 5, 2012.
"2014 Highest 6091 (Defendant A)" and "2014 Highest 880 (Defendant B)"
1. On January 15, 2008, the Defendants made a false statement to the victim G at the H Co., Ltd. office operated by the victim G in the third floor of the F building in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, and the victim G, stating that “The victim G will have a shower operating right of 20 million won as the operating expenses of the association in the Jeju-gu, Seoul-gu, Seoul-do.”
However, even if the defendants received money from the victim because they did not acquire the right to operate the shower apartment redevelopment apartment in the area 8 of the State, they did not have the intention or ability to exercise the right to operate the shower apartment redevelopment apartment in the area 8 of the State.
Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired to deception the victim as above and received two copies of the cashier’s checks from the victim, namely, 10 million won.
(2) On April 10, 2008, the Defendants told the victim G at the J&Dong Office located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City J&A office that stated that “The Defendants shall pay the amount of bills by July 10, 2008, when the wind industry is selected as a contractor on June 2008 after the general assembly ends and the wind industry is selected as a contractor, it is necessary to conduct a survey on the general assembly survey for the selection of apartment construction works related to housing redevelopment in the territory of the territory of the Republic of Korea, and for the cost of the general assembly, it is necessary to pay the amount of bills by July 10, 2008.”
However, even if the residents' general meeting is held, the project cannot be selected until July 10, 2008, and even if the project received the money from the contractor, there was no right to use it at will. Therefore, there was no intention or ability to pay the amount equivalent to the bill received from the victim.
Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired to induce the victim as above, thereby inducing the victim.