logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.04.27 2015고단4077
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 1, 2014, the Defendant concluded that “The Defendant would pay the principal household to E, who is an operator of the victim Co., Ltd., Ltd., a household business entity in Si-si and 101, supplied the principal household at five studio new construction sites, such as Si-si F, Si-si.”

However, the defendant has no intention or ability to pay the price even if he/she receives the main household from the injured party because he/she was unable to pay the price due to the lack of assets and financial ability in the name of the defendant who can be used as the contract price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received a total of KRW 16 million from August 2014 to early September 2014 from the victim or from the victim and acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of G and H;

1. Corporation registry;

1. Each contract for supply of goods;

1. Determination on the Defendant of each construction agreement and defense counsel’s assertion

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant was unable to pay the price to the victim because he was unable to receive the construction cost from the project owner, but there was no criminal intent to acquire pecuniary profits equivalent to the price of the household in the ruling.

2. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence examined above.

(1) The Defendant was unable to pay the construction price to the subcontractor unless he receives the construction price from the subcontractor due to the lack of assets and financial resources under the name of the Defendant who can be used as the construction price.

(2) While ordering the victim to pay the principal household, the Defendant did not explain the fact that the victim may pay the principal household to which the victim will deliver, only when he/she receives the construction cost from the owner.

(3) The Defendant is not paying the full price of household to the victim up to now.

(4) The defendant delayed construction of the studio.

arrow