logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2012.08.24 2011고단7537
사기
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The facts charged of this case is a person in charge of consulting business start-up while working as the team leader of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and the Defendant is a substantial operator of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) established for the purpose of Doz, Screaming and sirening business.

The Defendant, through D’s work as the team leader of E’s business start-up consulting team, had given 10 conditions from around 2008 to around 10, but the franchise contract was terminated and the amount to be returned to the Defendant and D to the contractor was approximately KRW 385 million. Furthermore, since around 2008, the Defendant had been accused of a complaint regarding the franchise franchise franchise franchise contract, the Defendant and D had entered into an additional franchise franchise franchise franchise store contract to solve the problem by receiving the down payment.

The Defendant and D at the Gangnam-gu Seoul E office on January 29, 2010, and the victim G, “H is expected to open a new H store in the Republic of Korea in which the victim F will be a seller of subssssssdy which have its head office in Japan. On April 1, 2010, the Defendant and D will be allowed to operate H-affiliated store in the first floor of the department store, so that H-affiliated store will be operated in the first floor of the department store. If the store is operated in the department store, profits equivalent to KRW 4 million per month is a business. If the sales store is delayed, the Defendant and D will pay the remainder of the payment of interest for the start-up fund and return all the start-up funds and consulting costs after the contract is terminated.” In short, the Defendant and the victim made a business start-up consulting contract between the victim and the Defendant, and the Defendant and the Defendant, respectively.

However, the Defendant was only a short-term event plan for the public relations with the sports department stores, and there was no agreement to sell Hdoz sales stores in the sports department stores, and thus Hdoz sales stores are located in the said department stores around April 1, 2010.

arrow