logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.04.09 2020고단741
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 26, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for embezzlement at the Daejeon District Court Branch of the Daejeon District Court on September 26, 2019, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 28, 2020.

1. On September 3, 2019, the Defendant committed the crime against the victim B: (a) contacted the victim B, who was part of the franchise restaurant “C” operated by the Defendant, with the victim B, who was part of the fee, and (b) made a false statement to the effect that “I would return 10% of profits if I lend money.”

However, at the time, the Defendant did not have any obligation of approximately KRW 50 million and did not have any friendship with the Defendant to play money and was thought to use the money as the Defendant’s living expenses, etc., so even if he borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to return the money.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received KRW 4,80,000 from the victim as the Agricultural Cooperative (E) account in the name of father of the Defendant on the same day.

2. On October 2017, the Defendant committed a crime against Victim F with the victim F: (a) received KRW 111.5 million from the victim F as the deposit for the purchase of “C” franchise; (b) but the franchise membership agreement was terminated; and (c) there was a debt equivalent to the said performance bond to the victim.

On July 19, 2019, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant would pay KRW 1,6860,000,000, including the performance bond 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, if he/she borrowed KRW 5,3660,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

However, at the time, the Defendant had a debt of approximately KRW 50 million, and was not able to receive a security deposit of KRW 20 million as above, and was thought to use money from the victim as the Defendant’s living expenses, etc., so there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the victim.

Nevertheless, it is not appropriate.

arrow