logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.08.09 2017고단2249
특수절도등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment for one year, and each of the defendants B shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants called “Singishing” organization members in Chinese nationality who are staying in the Republic of Korea due to travel travel, called “Singishing” call to the persons subject to “Sing” by misrepresenting the employees of the government offices, including the post offices and the Financial Supervisory Service, and conspired in sequence to commit larceny by taking part of the amount of damage, upon withdrawing cash and keeping it inside the house, with the instructions of the staff members of the “Sing”, if the persons subject to the visit withdraw and keep the cash at the house, the Defendants: (a) upon receiving the instructions of the staff members of the Fing staff of the said persons, contacted into the house; and (b) delivered the said persons other than the “Singishing”; and (c) by receiving part of the amount of damage.

1. On May 24, 2017, Defendant A (A and A)’s sole criminal name “scaming” called from the victim E (the age 62) living in Gangwon-si at around 09:20 on May 24, 2017 to visit the post office and the employees of the Financial Supervisory Service to the effect that “the post office’s credit card was created by personal information leakage and continued to withdraw from the passbook, and the door password was collected to protect the house’s house was removed, and the door password was removed to protect the house’s house.” The staff of Defendant A and A sent the victim a 2,360,000 won in cash from the location of the Saemaeul at the Gangwon-si level at the Gangwon-si level, and then sent the victim’s personal information leakage to the victim’s house within 30,000,000 won in cash, and then divided the victim’s residence into the victim’s name and 334,000,0000 won in cash.”

In other words, theft was committed by means of theft.

Accordingly, the defendant is not entitled to name.

arrow