logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.03.05 2014고단98
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 2010, the criminal defendant against the victim B said, “A person who lends his/her name to open a mobile phone and prevents the victim from paying the mobile phone fee” to the victim B at an insular location in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and was using two mobile phones in the victim’s name with the consent of the victim who believed it true. On June 16, 2011, the criminal defendant deceivings the victim as if he/she would normally pay the mobile phone fee even though he/she could not pay the mobile phone fee normally even though he/she could not pay the mobile phone fee, and caused the victim to pay it on behalf of KRW 202,90,00,000 from around that day to June 25, 2013, the defendant did not pay it to the victim in total on 26 occasions, such as the attached list of crimes, in lieu of the total amount of the mobile phone fee, and did not pay it to the victim.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 6,913,470.

2. On December 2012, 2012, the criminal defendant against the victim C made a false statement to the victim C, stating that “The funds, machinery, office, etc. in connection with the present 060 telephone business have been prepared at the latest 15 million won. The loan of this money is to be made within three months.” From the victim on December 20, 2012, the defendant received six million won from the victim at the mutual influent restaurant in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Dongdaemun-gu, and nine million won from the above restaurant on December 27, 2012.

However, at the time of fact, the defendant was in bad credit standing and did not have certain income or assets and did not have the ability to properly carry out the telephone service 060, so even if he borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to repay it.

In this respect.

arrow