logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.05.21 2019고단123
사기
Text

Defendant is each of the crimes described in [Attachment 1] through 5] Nos. 1 to 5 of the List of Offenses in the Decision 2018 Highest 123, and the order 2018 Highest 178.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On September 14, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for criminal fraud at the Suwon District Court on October 14, 2018, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 22, 2018.

【Criminal Facts】

Around September 10, 2018, the Defendant posted a letter “sale of heavy smartphones” on the Internet website, and made a false statement to the effect that “the victim E, who had contacted with the Internet, will send money first to send money.”

However, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to sell the goods even if he received the price from the injured party because the Defendant did not possess the goods after selling them as above.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 130,000 won from the company bank account (Account Number:F, Interlock Account Number:G) in the name of the Defendant from the victim on the same day, and, from that time to December 11, 19 of the same year, by deceiving the victims of the sale of used goods through the above method 31 times from that time, and by deceiving the victims of the sale of used goods, and by deceiving them from the victims as if they were in the above method, received total KRW 4,031,00.

Accordingly, the defendant was provided property by deceiving the victims.

around 12:15 on October 29, 2017, the Defendant stated that “I will send A6 with galthal thalthal thalthal thalthal thalthalthal thalthalthal thalthalthal thalthalthal thalthalthalthalthal thalthalthalthalthm thalthalthalthalthm thalthalthalthalthm thalthalthalthalthalthm thalthalthalthalth

However, at the time, the defendant did not have the most recent mobile phone such as gallonis, so even if he received the price from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to sell the mobile phone.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim and is in the name of the defendant from the victim.

arrow