logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.10.12 2017고단1509
사기
Text

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

The defendant shall pay 37 million won to the applicant for compensation. The above compensation order shall be issued.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 4, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would sell a vehicle purchased if the card payment falls short of 2 million won and would repay it on the last day after selling it to the victim C at an office within the E-automobile trading complex located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.”

However, the defendant did not own any property at the time and did not have a clear source of revenue, and the amount borrowed from the damaged person was thought to be used for the money for sports Saturdays, so there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if it was borrowed from the damaged person.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 2 million from the victim for the same day as the credit card settlement price and living expenses, and received KRW 10 million in total five times from the date of the occurrence to April 2, 2014, such as the statement in the list of crimes in the annexed crime.

2. On March 14, 2013, the Defendant, under the pretext of the purchase price of a vehicle, is not enough to purchase a good vehicle to the victim C at the same place as that described in paragraph (1) around March 14, 2013.

It would be possible to obtain large profits from sales if the highest goods are disposed of after purchase.

When lending 10 million won, all of the borrowed money so far shall be repaid.

“The purpose of “ was to make a false statement.”

However, the defendant did not own property at the time and did not have a clear source of revenue, and the amount borrowed from the damaged person was thought to be used for sports Saturdays or living expenses, so even if he borrowed money from the damaged person, he did not have an intention or ability to repay it.

As can be seen, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 10 million from the injured party under the same name as the purchase price of the vehicle on the same day, and received KRW 10 million around April 15, 2013, and KRW 7 million around May 14, 2013, respectively, on three occasions in total.

arrow