Text
1. The defendant's KRW 5,884,226 against the plaintiff A and 5% per annum from August 1, 2020 to November 26, 2020.
Reasons
1. Basic facts are prosecuted against the plaintiffs under the name of fraud and sentenced to two years of suspended sentence for six months in the first instance trial (U.S. District Court Decision 2019 High Court Decision 2662). At present, the defendant appealeds the above judgment and continues the appellate trial (U.S. District Court Decision 2020No4163). Of the criminal facts recognized in the judgment of the first instance court, the part related to the plaintiffs is as follows.
[The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence No. 7, a significant fact in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings] The defendant (the defendant guardian, hereinafter the same shall apply) is a person who operates the garmentment point in the trade name of "E" in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, and the victim B and the victim A (the plaintiff is citing the expression of criminal judgment; hereinafter the same shall apply) is a guest who purchased a scrubing, etc. in the above store from 2014 to 2018, and has maintained a transaction relation with the defendant.
1. On April 9, 2018, the criminal defendant against the victim B made a false statement to the victim by telephone in the vicinity of the Italian Veneia, stating, “I have left the goods in Europe and lost the wallet. I would immediately return to the Republic of Korea upon lending KRW 10 million.”
However, even if the defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from the victim, the defendant did not have an intention to pay it immediately.
The Defendant received KRW 10 million from the victim to the new bank account (G) in the name of F, and acquired it by fraud.
2. Fraud against A by a victim;
A. On July 9, 2018, the defrauded made a false statement to the effect that “Around July 9, 2018, the Defendant purchased the Plaintiff’s airline tickets at the Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City D and the garmentment point of “E” from the early July 2018, to the effect that “I would purchase the airline tickets at a container of 30% if I would like to purchase the airline tickets if I would like to purchase the airline tickets.”
However, there is a lack of operating expenses of the clothing store that the defendant operated at the time.