logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.11.27 2015고정2221
사기
Text

Defendant

A A Fine of 2,00,000 won, Defendant B of 50,000 won, Defendant C of 2,000,000 won, Defendant C of 2,00,000 won, and Defendant.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A, Defendant C, and Defendant D’s co-principal committed joint crimes from around August 2008 to May 201, 201, the head of the G branch (hereinafter “instant organization”), Defendant C’s head vice-chairperson, Defendant D’s head of the Secretariat, submitted a false business plan due to lack of office operation expenses, etc., and the Defendant A, Defendant C, and Defendant D submitted it to the Daegu Metropolitan City of the victim, and were provided with subsidies from the victim to use it as operating expenses of the instant organization.

Defendant

A, Defendant C, and Defendant D conspired, around September 4, 2009, submitted a project plan in 2010 to implement nature protection, juvenile guidance activities, and Albunter-dong patrol, etc. in Daegu Metropolitan City welfare policies in the fair 88-gu, Daegu-gu.

However, the fact is that, after paying the subsidy received from the victim due to the shortage of the funds for the operation of the instant organization, the financial institution received the subsidy again from the Daegu Bank account (H) in the name of Defendant D and planned to use it as the funds for the operation of the instant organization, and thus there was no intention or ability to proceed with the business

Nevertheless, Defendant A, Defendant C, and Defendant D deceiving the victim as above, and they acquired the total sum of KRW 10 million from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010 from the victim to the Daegu Bank Account (J) in the name of an incorporated association from January 1 to December 31, 2010.

B. On September 9, 2010, Defendant A, Defendant C, and Defendant D conspired and submitted a project plan in 2011 to provide nature protection, juvenile leading activities, and police patrol, etc. in Daegu Metropolitan City welfare policies in an equitable 88-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu.

However, the fact is that the office of the instant organization received the subsidy from the victim due to the shortage of funds for the operation of the instant organization, and it again received the subsidy from the victim to the Daegu Bank account (H) in the name of Defendant D.

arrow