(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2013.08.22 2013고단176

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2013.08.22 2013고단176

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around 15:00 on June 28, 2012, the Defendant concluded that “The Defendant would supply ice rap within 6-7 days on the face of the week,” to the Victim G operating F, a company collecting high water at the E plant operated by the Defendant at Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si.”

However, in fact, the Defendant spent the operating fund of 2 billion won or more due to the investment in the unreasonable facilities at the time, and was liable to the financial institutions, etc. for the debt amounting to 700 million won or more, and due to the customer’s default, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the price within the above period, even if he received the scrap scrap from the victim.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, was supplied by the victim with a total amount of KRW 38,160 g market price of KRW 309,09,00 at around that time, and acquired it by deception.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each prosecutor's office and police interrogation protocol of the accused (including G substitute part);

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning filing of complaints, electronic tax invoices, supply materials and photographs of production materials, and copies of bills to be collected;

1. In light of the pertinent legal provisions on criminal facts, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the choice of punishment, and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant was not guilty, since he had the intent and ability to pay the price at the time of receiving the goods from the victim but was unable to pay the said price due to business difficulties thereafter, the Defendant is not guilty. Accordingly, according to the above evidence, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant should be acquitted. Accordingly, according to the above evidence, since it was unreasonable from the time of receiving the goods from the victim to receive the goods from another customer, it refers to the payment for

참조조문

-형법 제347조 제1항

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 원주지원 2015.12.29 2015고정477

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2014.05.28 2014고단341

-대전지방법원 2014. 06. 19. 선고 2013구합101882 판결

-서울서부지방법원 2015.01.15 2014노1012

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.2.11. 선고 2013고합1073 판결