logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.01.10 2013노1230
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant received the instant contract money by deceiving D, even if he/she did not obtain the power of representation from a school juristic person E-private teaching institute, or was notified of termination of a service contract granting the power of representation at least, and thereby, he/she received the instant contract money by deceiving D, thereby recognizing the criminal intent of

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that it erred.

2. On December 15, 2009, the Defendant presented a service contract in which the victim D entered into a development project agreement to build and operate a driving range on September 7, 2007 with the Defendant, etc. on the real estate owned by the school foundation E and the said school foundation within the Seongbuk-gu Seoul building 202, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, and that he/she has all authority as the representative of the president of the school foundation E and/or E and/orth of the educational foundation E and/orth of the educational foundation E and/orth of the educational foundation E and thus, he/she would succeed to the right to develop and operate a driving range at the H University in both countries.

However, in fact, the Defendant had already been notified of the termination of the above service contract by the H University on December 11, 2009. Thus, the Defendant had no authority to act for the president of the HAF, and there was no intention or ability to act normally on the part of the victim.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, was urged by the victim to receive KRW 50 million from the victim, namely, a delivery from the victim under the pretext of the agreement to succeed to the above business rights.

3. The lower court determined that the instant facts charged constituted a case where there is no proof of crime, and sentenced the Defendant not guilty on the following grounds.

On September 7, 2007, the Defendant and I obtained permission for the construction of a driving range in the name of the above driving range in the G site in two weeks between the school juristic person EA (hereinafter “the above school”) and the above school juristic person EA on September 7, 2007.

arrow