logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 포항지원 2017.12.21 2017고단851
사기등
Text

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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

After the Defendant became aware of the so-called “work loan” business entity that received a loan from a financial institution by making a false document through site search, the Defendant conspiredd with C, D, E, etc., the above business entity, and, in fact, the Defendant concluded a lease contract with respect to an apartment owned by F, even though the Defendant did not have concluded a lease contract with respect to the apartment owned by F, and provided the above apartment with a lease deposit by forging the apartment lease contract, etc.

1. On January 23, 2013, in collusion with C, D, E, etc., the Defendant entered “I”, “I”, “I”, and “F” in the name column in the column of indication of real estate lease contract real estate at the office of mutual infinite brokerage located in the Dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong 101, Dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong 403, and “I” and “F” in the resident registration number column and the name column of F.

F’s seal was affixed.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with C, D, E, etc., forged a copy of a real estate lease agreement in F, a private document on rights and obligations.

2. On January 28, 2013, the Defendant: (a) conspired with C, D, E, etc. to use the said investigation document; (b) at the heading point of the national bank bank, which is located in the 1st unit of the Dong-gu Hodong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong

3. The Defendant, in collusion with C, D, E, etc., submitted a forged apartment lease contract to an employee in charge of the above bank loan at the time and place specified in the above paragraph (2), and the Defendant paid 150 million won to the building owner and resides in the lease at all times.

The term “tegrative loan” was false, stating that the deposit is provided as security.

(b).

arrow