logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2013.04.12 2011고단1481
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

"2011 Highest 1481"

1. The Defendant had the intent to forge a monthly rent contract under the name of E, the contractor for the instant officetel, while selling the officetel No. 3812, Goyang-dong, Manyang-si, Ilyang-si, Seoul, to D.

On June 23, 2009, the Defendant: (a) in Freal estate operated by the Defendant in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu; (b) written an officetel monthly rent contract using a computer in the column for the seat of the officetel; (c) written the officetel monthly rent contract in the column for the seat of the officetel; (d) “O million won” in the column for the rent; (c) “O million won” in the column for the lessor; and (d) written the lessee’s name in the column for the lessor’s name in the column for the lessor’s name.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged one of the monthly rent contracts in the name of E, a private document on rights and duties.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and place as set forth in Paragraph 1, exercised the monthly charter contract for an officetel that is forged as set forth in Paragraph 1, as if it was duly formed with K (D’) who is unaware of the circumstances.

3. The Defendant, as stated in Paragraph 1, displayed the monthly rent agreement with K, which is the victim D’s reference at a time and place, as stated in Paragraph 1, that “The monthly rent of KRW 5,500,000 per month is 5,000,000,000 monthly rent is 5,000,000 won, to be sold to 84,000,000 won on condition that he succeeds to the existing monthly rent agreement.”

However, at the time, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to sell an officetel on the condition as above to the victim, for the following reasons: (a) at the time, the Defendant: (b) had determined the officetel as the deposit for the lease on a deposit basis; and

Nevertheless, the Defendant received 8 million won from the victim around June 23, 201, and 70 million won around June 26, 201, respectively.

Accordingly, the defendant is the victim.

arrow