beta
Text
Defendant: (a) a crime of heading 803 of [1] [2015] [1] [1] [2] [2] [1] [2] [2] [3] [2] [2] [3] [2] [3]] [2] [2] [3] [3]] [2] [2
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal records] On April 22, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for a period of six months in the Changwon District Court for fraud, etc., and the said judgment became final and conclusive on the 30th of the same month.
[Criminal facts] 2015 Highest 803
1. On March 20, 2015, the victim E-related criminal defendant: (a) at the G office located in Kimhae-si F on March 20, 2015, the victim E provided that “on the purchase of a truck by H camera, which is a logistics transport vehicle, would arrange for a transportation job; and (b) “the purchase price for the vehicle to be purchased by introducing capital shall be paid with the loan”; and (c) prepared a certificate of transfer for the said vehicle between the victim and the victim.
However, in fact, the defendant was thought that he would receive money from the victim to use it for other debt repayment, etc., and there was no specific delegation from the actual owner of the above truck with authority to act as a sales agent or intermediary, and there was no property owned to meet the purchase price of the vehicle, so even if he received money from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to allow the victim to carry out transportation by purchasing the truck as agreed upon by the victim, even if he did not receive the money from the victim.
Ultimately, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received the money of KRW 45 million as the purchase price of the vehicle from the victim who received the loan under the name of the victim.
2. On August 24, 2015, the victim I-related criminal defendant told the victim I to purchase L, which is owned by 4.5 tons of L, Co., Ltd., Ltd., for the purpose of transportation as a subcontractor by allowing the victim I to purchase the above vehicle at KRW 73 million including the previous loan amounting to KRW 16 million.
However, the fact was that the defendant received money from the injured party from the purchase price of the truck, and was thought to use it to repay other debts, etc., and the truck owner L.