(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.07.07 2016고단4087

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.07.07 2016고단4087

사기

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operated a mutual tester of “C” and performed the remodeling construction of the building “E” on the fourth floor of the D Building in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government between January 2 and February 2016.

1. On February 16, 2016, the Defendant said that “A victim F, who is a telecommunications equipment and facilities business operator, shall be responsible for the partial installation of the telecommunications equipment and facilities of E, would pay the price as at the end of the prime construction work.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any property with particular responsibility at the time, and even if the Defendant received all the construction cost from E due to the financial shortage at the time, there was a shortage of money for the payment of the construction cost promised by the victim, and the Defendant planned to use part of the construction cost received from E as living expenses, and there was no intention or ability to pay the price even if the victim completed the construction of telecommunications facilities.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and let the victim take such steps from February 17, 2016 to the same year.

2. Until December 21, 200, by allowing the construction of telecommunications facilities and equipment of the building, the construction cost was 5,433,600 won or more.

2. On February 18, 2016, the defrauded G said that “The Defendant would pay KRW 2,500,000 as the completion of the construction work on the face of the implementation of the E favorable construction work,” to the Victim G, who is a glass constructor by telephone.

However, due to the reasons such as the above 1, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the price even if the victim completes the work of glass.

The Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) had the victim perform a favorable construction work equivalent to KRW 2,500,000 on the building on February 20, 2016; and (c) obtained pecuniary benefits equivalent to the said amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement concerning G and F;

1. Construction confirmations and transaction specifications 1.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2019.06.07 2017고단2506

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2017.05.26 2017고정483

-서울북부지방법원 2020.01.30 2019고단2034

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2016.11.04 2016고정176

-전주지방법원 2020.01.16 2019고단1339