beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[2014 High Court Decision 546]
1. On April 20, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant will work from the Dada as an employee at the Dada bank operated by the Victim B, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and that “A will work as the employee at the Dada bank,” while introducing the Defendant to the victim, the Defendant stated that “A will work as the employee at the Dada bank, who will work as the employee at the Dada bank.”
However, even if the defendant received advance payment from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to work as a multilateral employee, and E was well aware of this fact.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim as E, received a delivery of KRW 1,600,000 in cash on the pretext of advance payment, and KRW 2,300,000 in total from a new bank passbook (Account Number:F) under the name of the Defendant.
Accordingly, the defendant acquired the victim's property in collusion with E.
2. On April 25, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim of Dda operated by the Victim C of the Sound Group B in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongbuk-gun, that “The cost of a hospital in Seoul is required and the prepaid deposit is KRW 2 million is borrowed.”
However, even if the Defendant received advance payment from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to work as a multi-company employee, and there was no need for hospital expenses at the time.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 2,00,000 from the single bank account (Account Number:G) under the name of the Defendant immediately in advance from the victim.
[2014 fixed-term 547] On April 30, 2013, the Defendant belonged to a false statement that “The Defendant would pay 1.5 million won with the advance payment from the day after the day after the day after the day after the day after the day when he/she becomes an employee because he/she had to adjust the mobile phone charges, etc.” from the I Multilater located in H on April 30, 2013.
However, even if a person receives a prepaid payment, he/she has no intention or ability to work as an employee.
The defendant deceivings the complainant as such.