logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.03.12 2013고단2398
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Fraud;

A. On April 1, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E at the Ulsan-gu Seoul District District Court (Seoul District Court Decision 200,000 won, 200,000 won, if he/she was unable to receive money at a place that was yet to receive money, and thus he/she would immediately repay the money to the victim E. However, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to make payment to the victim.

On April 14, 201, the Defendant received KRW 2 million from the victim via the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number:F) in the name of A on April 14, 201.

B. On April 201, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim that “I would immediately repay if I would lend KRW 10 million to the victim, because I would like to receive money at a place where I would have received money, and thus would not pay the construction cost.”

However, there was no intention or ability to repay to the victim.

The Defendant received KRW 10 million from the victim on May 2, 201 to the said Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of the Defendant on May 2, 201.

C. Around July 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim that “I would immediately repay 5 million won if I would have lent the construction cost to the victim because I could not complete the construction cost with a mother and child.”

However, there was no intention or ability to repay to the victim.

The Defendant received KRW 5 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in A’s name on July 14, 201.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim and obtained a total of KRW 17 million through three times, and acquired it by fraud.

2. The Defendant at the same place as Paragraph 1(a) in March 2012, he urged E to repay the obligations described in Paragraph 1, and knew of the forgery, saying, “The checks which have been suspended and put in place in Seoul at the same place may not be used now, but may be used immediately if the check is opened by the person who puts the check, the name may be used.”

arrow