logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2021.02.18 2020노789
사기
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant introduced a siren car company to the victim and did not directly receive an advance of KRW 10 million from the victim, and the victim entered into a contract with a siren car company and a vehicle entered in the facts charged (hereinafter “the instant vehicle”). The Defendant, when using the instant vehicle by sirening or lending the instant vehicle to the victim, proceeds from the vehicle payment (hereinafter “payment”). If the Defendant did not make an installment, he would help the Defendant to some extent.

In other words, the defendant paid an amount equivalent to KRW 28 million in installments between the actual three years of payment and KRW 6 million in insurance premium, and the vehicle in this case is to have divided one half by half when disposing of it later.

Of the credit card payment for the purchase of D vehicles, eight million won is known to have been received from D by the victim, and two million won is well known to the defendant and between the victim and D.

In light of the victim's testimony in the court below, it seems that the defendant did not enter into an agreement on the advance payment when there was no profit between the defendant and the victim, the victim did not request the profits of the defendant, and the victim is expected to not receive the profits so long as there was no profit from the installment payment or the victim did not have any profit from the installment. Thus, even if the defendant did not pay part of the advance payment due to the vehicle of this case, and even if the defendant did not pay the profits to the victim, it is not recognized the intention to acquire the advance payment from the victim.

In light of the I’s testimony at the lower court, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the instant vehicle is a long-term siren vehicle, or was unable to sell or transfer the instant vehicle after the fact.

shall be deemed to be.

arrow