logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.09.05 2017고단3673
사기등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Criminal facts

The Defendant conspired to commit the crime of fraud by making a false statement to the men who had reported and contacted the advertisements of sexual traffic in C and smartphone-rating display, and by receiving the price of sexual traffic, as if they would arrange sexual traffic.

1. Around 23:11 on May 23, 2017, the Defendant and C, according to the above conspiracy, concluded that the victim E, who reported and contacted with the Defendant and C on false sexual traffic advertisements posted on “D”, a smartphone-type display, would have assisted the victim E to engage in sexual traffic with “H” and “I”, which are women of sexual traffic, under subparagraph 202 of the G youth 202 located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si.

However, the defendant and C did not have the intention or ability to arrange sexual traffic to the victim.

On May 24, 2017, the Defendant and C received 450,000 won from the injured party as the price for sexual traffic from the above Gel 202 around 00:01.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim in collusion with C.

2. Around 00:50 on May 24, 2017, the Defendant and C, according to the above conspiracy, reported false sexual traffic advertisements posted by the Defendant and C on “D”, a smartphone-type display, and made a false statement to the victim J. who had contacted with the Defendant by reporting false sexual traffic advertisements at the victim J. who had contacted with the Defendant, at the Lel located in K located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si.

However, the defendant and C did not have the intention or ability to arrange sexual traffic to the victim.

On May 24, 2017, at around 00:50 on May 24, 2017, the Defendant and C attempted to receive sexual traffic payments from the victims of sexual traffic, but it was not discovered by a police officer who was dispatched by the victim's report and was unsatisfed.

Accordingly, the Defendant conspiredd with C to have attempted to receive property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Police in relation to C.

arrow