logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2013.11.08 2013고단2142
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant was sentenced in Seoul High Court on December 18, 2009 to imprisonment with one year and six months for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and completed the execution of the sentence in Ansan prison on March 10, 201, and is the actual operator of the Dispute Resolution D.

1. On September 2012, 2012, the Defendant against the victim E stated, “In the office of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. (F 2th 208, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu, 201, our company is a company producing mobile phone charging devices, and our company is a company producing mobile phone charging devices, and our company is a Chinese factory if it has been supplied a note to us, and it will be sent to PCB to us again after assembling it to us, and then will be supplied to us again. The Defendant will send the note to us and manufacture goods after sending it to the Chinese factory. The price will be paid in cash at the end of the following month of the month when the delivery was made.”

However, in fact, the defendant received the note from the victim, and then disposed of it as it was to use it as the company operation fund, sent it to the Chinese factory, and did not intend to make the PCB flag board, and therefore, there was no intention or ability to pay the price to the victim as agreed.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, was issued from September 7, 2012 to November 5, 2011, an explanatory note equivalent to KRW 294,60,900 at the market price as shown in the annexed crime inundation sheet, from around 10 to around 10 times.

2. Around October 10, 2012, the criminal defendant against the victim H told the victim I representative H to pay KRW 4,620,000,00,00,00 including surtax, until November 2012, when the defendant supplied the 42 won per dog, electronic components, to the victim I’s representative H.

However, even if the above parts are supplied and sold by hand, there was no intention or ability to pay the price for the goods to the victim, such as the agreement, because the sales price is to be used as the employee's benefits or the company's operating funds.

arrow