logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 서부지원 2019.05.31 2017고단1915
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

To the extent that there is no substantial disadvantage in exercising the defendant's right of defense, part of the facts charged was revised.

The Defendant, around September 2015, 2015, “2017 Godan1915,” extended a debt from a bank as a security for the operation of a company to KRW 2.9 billion, and extended a debt from an individual to KRW 460 million. Since around that time, the Defendant was obliged to pay the principal and interest equivalent to KRW 450 million to KRW 500,000 per month, even if the Defendant disposed of the factory site, etc. operated by the Defendant, it was insufficient to repay the above debt even if he borrowed money from others.

1. Fraud against the victim B;

A. On November 13, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B at the office D office of the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government, stating that “A company will lend money in which the operation of the company is difficult, and a F factory in Gangseo-gu E is disposed of, the company will be repaid immediately if it is disposed of.”

However, the fact did not have the intention or ability to repay even if it borrowed money from the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and deceiving him from the victim to the Daegu Bank Account under the name of the Defendant, obtained each transfer of KRW 30 million on November 13, 2015, and KRW 40 million on November 30, 2015, respectively, and acquired KRW 10 million on November 30, 2015 from the victim.

B. Around October 2015, the Defendant made a false statement with the victim’s office stating, “The Defendant shall process the lectures received from the original company and deliver the original parts to the original company, and shall supply the parts to the original company on the face of the main company and pay the processing fees.”

However, in fact, even if the victim supplied the processed parts to the original company and received the price, it was intended to use them as the defendant's operating funds, etc., and there was no intention or ability to pay it normally to the victim.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above.

arrow