(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.09.22 2016노503 | 리걸엔진

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) 대구지방법원 2016.09.22 2016노503

사기

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged, even though the Defendant knew that the Defendant could not recover the price of goods from G, received goods from the victim company with knowledge of the fact that the Defendant received goods from the victim company.

Therefore, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant is a person engaged in mechanical manufacturing with the trade name “C”.

On April 201, 201, the Defendant, at the office operated by the Defendant in Daegu Northern-gu D, the Defendant, called “F,” who is an employee of the Victim E Co., Ltd., a logistics handling equipment manufacturer, will purchase the logistics handling equipment.

First of all, the supply of logistics handling equipment will be settled by selling or installing the equipment to another company at the end of the month after supplying or installing it.

“A false representation was made.”

However, in fact, after manufacturing and supplying machinery to G Co., Ltd. around August 16, 2010, the Defendant was in a situation in which promissory notes worth KRW 145 million paid as the price were not settled, and it was unclear whether the Defendant was unable to receive the payment from other clients. On the other hand, the Defendant was responsible for the Defendant’s liability of KRW 70 million for more than 20 trading companies, and was responsible for the Defendant’s personal liability of KRW 30 million, and the employees had financial difficulties to the extent that the amount of wages is not properly paid. Accordingly, there was no intention or ability to settle the payment even if the Defendant was supplied with the logistics handling equipment by the victim company.

Around May 23, 2011 from F to F, the Defendant: (a) the sum equivalent to KRW 3,080,00,000 in total of the equipment dealing with logistics, such as LIG TTRCK, owned by the Victim Company; (b) the sum equivalent to KRW 1,683,00 on June 11, 201; (c) the sum equivalent to KRW 6,160,000 in the sum of LIGHTRACK, etc. on June 23, 2011; (d) the sum equivalent to KRW 6,160,000 in the sum of LIGHTRTRACK, etc. on June 23, 2011; and (e) the sum equivalent to KRW 220,00,00 in A/BND S/W on June 24, 201; and (e) the sum of KRW 36,63,000 on August 4, 2011

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.01.22 2015고단5248

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.07.07 2017고단492

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.11.28 2018고단2903

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.06.05 2014고단2751

-전주지방법원 정읍지원 2018.05.01 2017고단156