logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.12.22 2006고단441
무고등
Text

Imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of the first, second, and third categories of crimes in the judgment of the defendant, and for the crimes of the third category of crimes in the judgment of the court.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

【Criminal Power】 On May 14, 2004, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor and two years at the Jung-gu District Court on September 3, 2004, with prison labor for a crime of false accusation or fraud, etc., and its judgment became final and conclusive on September 3, 2004 and Supreme Court Decision 2004Do3473, August 23, 2005, with ten months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Southern District Court, the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2004Da3412, Jun. 9, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Southern District Court on September 1, 2006 and completed the execution of the sentence at the Seoul Southern District Court on December 13, 2007, which became final and conclusive on August 14, 2008 by the Central District Court on March 208, 2008.

Supreme Court Decision 2014Do13647 Decided October 1, 2003 206Da441 Decided 2006) 1. The Defendant prepared a complaint against the Defendant, the Defendant, which stated that “A, D, and E shall have a promissory note delivered from D under the pretext of discounting a promissory note, for the purpose of having C, D, and E criminal punishment on or around October 15, 2003, and it shall not have a promissory note delivered from D, despite that C, D, and E shall not have a receipt of a promissory note under the pretext of paying D’s credit,” in sequence, “C, D, and E shall, in consultation with the Defendant on April 24, 2001, issue and deliver to the Defendant a false promissory note causing KRW 402 G, the face value of which is KRW 300,000,000,000 to acquire pecuniary benefits equivalent to the above amount by removing the Defendant from its debt equivalent to the face value of the promissory note.”

arrow