logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.02.19 2018고정2399
사기
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 14,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is the representative of the “stock company B”, a corporation that runs the remaining and food business with a total of six points in Seoul and the Seoul metropolitan area.

On August 31, 2017, the Defendant told the victim G through F, who is an employee, that he would exercise the right of 300,000 won of the contract amount on March 30, 2018.

However, around that time, corporation B was liable for a loan amounting to approximately KRW 3.5 billion, approximately KRW 60 million in the year 2016, approximately KRW 1.7 billion in the year 2017, and around August 2017, each branch was in arrears with monthly rent, management fee, employee's wage, customer's payment, etc. from around August 2017, and thus, even if concluding a pro rata contract with the victim, there was no intention or ability to continue the work normally.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 50,00 from the victim to the H Bank Account (I) in the name of the H Bank Account in August 31, 2017, under the name of the victim as contract deposit, and received from the victim.

9.3. 2.50,000 won was settled by credit card and the sum of 300,000 won was acquired by deception.

The defendant from 2010 to 2010 is a person who has operated 6 stores B (J, K, D, L, M, N, etc.) (including J, K, D, L, M, N, etc.), which is an exclusive store for the care of victims.

On February 24, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “N” on the third floor of the O building in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Sungnam-si, through employees P, etc., would pay KRW 300,000 won of the down payment, to the victim Q Q, i.e., “I believe that it will vicariously reduce the 15:30 on February 24, 2018 and pay the down payment.”

However, in fact, the Defendant had no intention or ability to normally exercise excessive financial standing from the beginning.

Nevertheless, the defendant, through the employee PP, deceiving the victim Q by preparing a contract related to the remaining balance immediately, and the defendant's remaining down payment from the victim Q Q.

arrow