206 Highest 4606 Fraudulent

Hyo

April 24, 2007

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Facts of crime

The Defendant is a regular manager of ○○ Construction Co., Ltd., and the Defendant: (a) around September 27, 2002, around September 27, 2002, decided to repay 2-3 months after 200 million won to the victim Nonparty ○○, who was an executive partner of ○○○ Construction; (b) around September 27, 2002, the Defendant opened a deposit account in the name of the said credit union and deposited 100 million won in the said account in order to reserve the money to be used for the acquisition fund; and (c) the Defendant was not directly delivered 10 million won;

Around October 24, 2002, the fact at the home of the victim of Ladong, Daegu-dong, 1275, Handong-dong, Daegu-dong, 1275 was, even if the above credit union withdraws 100 million won from the above credit union, it was not intended to repay it to the victim or re-deposit it in the name of the victim to another safe credit union. However, through the above Kim○-dong, the victim should promptly withdraw the money deposited in the name of the victim through the above Kim○-dong through the above Kim○-dong, the victim's money to be re-deposited to another safe place after finding the money, and then it was received from the victim through the above Kim Jong-dong, and then received the victim's seal and deposit passbook from the victim through the above Kim Jong-dong-dong, and then received it by the means of remitting it to the non-indicted ○ on the same day after withdrawing the deposit 100 million won from the above credit union.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the statement of the defendant in the fifth trial record; and

1. Legal statement of the witness Kim ○○;

1. Statement made by a witness ○○ in the seventh trial records;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against Defendant and Kim ○○

1. Each police statement made in relation to 00, 00, and 00;

1. A new statement;

1. A copy of passbook receipt and account transaction;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles and selection of species;

Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act

Judgment on Defendant’s argument

The defendant asserts that as long as 100 million won has been promised to lend 100 million won to the defendant and 100 million won has been deposited in the above credit union, the lending of money has already been made thereafter, and that it does not constitute fraud even if written in a place different from the original usage.

6. The crime of fraud is established by taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the defendant's financial power before and after the crime, environment, details of the crime, the process of transaction, etc. If the defendant does not make a confession, unless he/she is the defendant, and in borrowing money from another person, if the other party would have failed to comply with the true notice regarding the purpose of the borrowed money or the method of raising funds to be repaid, such fraud shall be established if he/she received money against the truth (Supreme Court Decision 2003Do5382 Decided September 15, 2005). According to the above evidence in this case, the defendant would have received 10,000,000 won from the above financial institution without obtaining a consent to take over the labor union as stated in the crime, and the defendant would have received 10,000,000 won from the above financial institution without obtaining a new deposit from the new account, and then withdrawn 10,000,000 won after taking over 10,000 won,000 won.

According to the above facts, although the victim deposited 100 million won in the new union upon the defendant's request for lending, the above money lending does not have been made at the time when the above money remains as deposit money because the account was an account in the name of the victim and the victim had the right to dispose of the deposit money because the account was the account in the name of the victim and the seal, and thus the defendant did not withdraw the above deposit money with the consent of the victim and then remitted it to the new ○○○. In addition, in light of the fact that the defendant withdraws the above deposit on the date of withdrawal of the deposit, the defendant did not have the intent to withdraw it from the beginning of the case and to use it as another new agreement with the new ○○○, and it seems that he thought that the defendant did not have the intention to take account of the fact that he had the intention to take over the above deposit money and that he had the above deposit money borrowed to the new ○○○. However, if the defendant notified the victim that the above deposit was lent to the new O, the defendant's assertion is without reason to establish fraud.

It is inevitable to impose a sentence on the defendant in consideration of the following: (a) It is a case where it is the case where it is important to obtain a large amount of KRW 100 million from the victim of the sentencing; (b) however, it is necessary to impose a sentence on the defendant in consideration of the fact that the ○○○ has paid a total of KRW 30 million to the victim on two occasions on December 12, 2004 and March 2, 2005, and only the remainder of KRW 70 million has not been repaid and there is no possibility that it can be repaid within the short time: Provided, That the defendant has no criminal record of the same kind or suspension of qualifications or more; and (c) the victim has paid approximately KRW 44 million from September 2002 to October 2, 203 as interest on the above KRW 100 million, etc.

Judge Lee Jin-ju