logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.07.03 2013고단6295
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[2013 Highest 6295]

1. Around May 17, 2012, the fraud Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “If the phrases are delivered, the victim would pay the price with a check, etc.” to the victim E at the office of the D company operated by the Defendant in Busan, Busan, the Defendant would pay the price with a check, etc.”

However, the Defendant did not reach KRW 717,620,00 of the check issued at that time, and was liable for a large amount of money, such as setting up a mortgage equivalent to KRW 333,60,000, in an apartment house owned in the name of wife F. In order to raise funds urgently needed, some of the phrases supplied by the victim was intended to sell less than the delivery. Therefore, even if the check was issued as the price for the sign, there was no intention or ability to pay the check at the maturity.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and is subject to such deception from the victim to the same year.

8. By no later than 17.17. received text messages equivalent to the market value of 242,454,520 won.

[2014 Highest 2242]

2. No person who violates the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act shall submit to the Government a false list of total tax invoices by seller under the Value-Added Tax Act;

Nevertheless, around January 25, 2010, the Defendant entered a false list of total tax invoices by seller in the Dong Tax Office located in Busan Metropolitan City, 112,076,000 won in supply price in G company, as if it actually supplied goods or services equivalent to KRW 112,076,00,000 in supply price in G company, and submitted to the public official in charge of the above tax office a false list of total tax invoices by seller, notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant had not been supplied goods or services equivalent to KRW 111,250,000 in supply price in the new stock market in the new stock market, although there was no supply of goods or services equivalent to KRW 111,250,00 in supply price in the new stock market.

b)a summary of the evidence;

arrow