(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.06.29 2017고정374

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) 서울서부지방법원 2017.06.29 2017고정374

사기등

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Around December 16:45, 2016, when the Defendant did not intend to pay the taxi fee, he/she was boarding a D operated by the victim C in the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Oil Market and acquired property gains equivalent to KRW 18,800,00, at the time of arrival in the Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan City City, the destination of which was scheduled to pay the taxi fee.

2. In the F District located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul on December 2, 2016, the Defendant: (a) requested the victim G, a security guard belonging to the said District, to pay the taxi fee and return home to the Defendant with respect to the said unclaimed passenger car; (b) the victim H and the above C, while there is a civil petitioner H and the above C, “Woo kis even before this rings,” the Defendant:

“,” “Wooh Babbk et al. from high school to police.”

Along to about 40 minutes, such as “this dog shall”, “the victim shall openly insult the victim.”

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement (the above purport that the victim G has expressed a desire to do so);

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that, among the facts charged in the instant case, the payment of the taxi fee was temporarily deferred in the course of making a studio more than the think of the taxi fee and the payment of the taxi fee was actually deferred in the course of making a studio, and that, in fact, it was not guilty since the police station paid the studio fee to the victim.

In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court: ① the Defendant sought a taxi fee from the victim C at the time of cash withdrawal in our bank near the independent station where the destination is located, making it possible for the Defendant to find a taxi fee to the victim C, thereby getting off the taxi and going to another place without our bank, and the victim C went to another place.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.02.15 2012고정4023

-서울남부지방법원 2015.01.22 2014고합455

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.05.29 2018고정129

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2012.04.05 2012고단648

-서울서부지방법원 2013.05.29 2013고단633