logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2019.10.18 2019고정651
사기
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

Punishment of the crime

On October 13, 2018, the Defendant posted a false statement to the effect that “Stonaland hives and hives will be sold” by accessing “B”, which is a mobile phone from the PC bank in Daegu to the Internet trading site of used goods. The Defendant reported the false statement to the victim C who visited the victim C, stating that “on deposit of money, they will deliver kives and hives when depositing money.”

However, in fact, the Defendant was not holding the above Stonaland swelves, and the photographs posted in B were sought through the Internet search, and was planned to use them for personal living expenses, etc. without sending the goods to the victim, so even if receiving the money from the victim, the Defendant did not have the intention or ability to send the above swelves.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 400,000 won from the victim’s account (E) on October 13, 2018, from the victim, and received 40,000 won in total from the victims four times until October 18, 2018, as indicated in the attached Table of Crimes (E).

In this respect, the defendant, by deceiving victims, acquired financial benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements and petitions of C, F, G and H;

1. Details of each account transfer and conversation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on response data by the D Bank;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 of the same Act concerning the applicable criminal facts, the choice of fines;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Taking into account the fact that the nature of the crime is not good in light of the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the method of committing the crime, the amount of defraudation, etc., the fact that there is no effort to recover the damage, and the fact that there

arrow