logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.11 2020노4344
사기
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The victim and K have forged a contract of carriage under the name of the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”), and acquired money from H to the E account in the name of the E, and the Defendant did not participate in all in the receipt of the defrauded money of this case.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted the same purport, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on this ground, on the grounds that, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant was recognized to have obtained money from the victim and acquired money from the victim.

① On April 9, 2012, the Defendant met the victim, J, and K at the office located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City L, and the transport contract between E and the victim was concluded at the above office.

Although the defendant asserts that he did not participate in the above contract, it is difficult to understand that he did not participate in the contract concluded in the name of the company operated by the defendant, and if K and the victim forged the contract of carriage under the name of E as the defendant's argument, there was no reason to forge the contract in the presence of the defendant.

In addition, on April 9, 2012, J, the victim, and K stated that they met themselves at the investigation agency and the defendant's office in M, and the defendant provided an explanation of the coal goods transport contract to the victim.

(2) The Defendant received remittance of the instant money to E’s account, which is one of its own businesses.

Most of the above amounts were used as E’s business fund.

In addition, the details of K’s personal use of the said money are not confirmed (where K in collusion with a victim, there is no reason to receive a remittance of money from H to the account managed by the Defendant). (3) On October 2012, the Defendant did not know about whether it would be “H from the place in which he met to H”.

arrow