(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2014.05.23 2014고단495

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) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2014.05.23 2014고단495

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 24, 2013, the Defendant sentenced 8 months to imprisonment with prison labor for habitual fraud, etc. in the Gwangju District Court's net support on September 24, 2013, and completed the execution of the sentence on February 4, 2014.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On February 4, 2014, around 20:30, the Defendant: (a) committed “E” entertainment bars for the operation of the victim D, which were in leisure time C; (b) as if they would normally pay the price; and (c) ordered the victim to provide entertainment services with three main entertainment workers and three main entertainment workers.

However, even if the defendant was provided with alcohol and service, he did not have the intention or ability to pay the price.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, was provided with alcohol and service equivalent to the total market value of 840,000 won in the same place.

"2014 Highest 543"

2. From March 27, 2014 to 05:00 on March 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) was engaged in the “G entertainment tavern” operated by the victim in the name of F during the leisure season from around 02:0 to from around 05:00, as if he would pay the normal drinking value; (b) ordered the employee and the employee’s service; (c) however, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the price even if he was provided with alcohol, alcohol, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim’s employees H; (b) received 2.50,000 won of the market price from H; and (c) did not pay 100,000 won of the service cost for female employees, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to KRW 100,00,000.

3. The Defendant from around March 30, 2014 to around 21:30.

3. 31. 02 02:00 p.m.

I. In the “J dan” operated by the victim on the second floor, the victim was engaged in as if he would pay the normal drinking value to K who is an employee, and ordered the drinking and massage. However, the fact did not have the intent or ability to pay the price even if he was provided with alcohol and alcohol.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceiving K, who is an employee of the victim, and belongs to it.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2020.01.31 2019고단3091

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2015.04.23 2015고단324

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2015.02.05 2014고단2360

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2015.05.08 2015고단495

-서울북부지방법원 2015.02.13 2014고단4199