logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.05 2019노854
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (definites), the representative of the victim Cmph (D) (hereinafter “victim’s clan”) made a consistent statement from the Defendant that “I shall set up a collateral security against the debtor as B in addition to the purpose of raising the purchase price for the instant real estate in order to occupy a favorable position in the future legal dispute between the victim’s clan and the senior clan, in relation to the ownership of the instant real estate, in order to occupy a 27 parcel of land and the ground building, including the 4,258 square meters of land owned by the victim’s clan.” (hereinafter “the above remarks”).

The victims' clans have experience in receiving an application for prohibition of disposal from the upper clans to take measures concerning the real estate of this case, and refer to the right to collateral security established with nine financial institutions, including the Dispute Resolution H, as the debtor, and the creditor, with regard to the real estate of this case as the right to collateral security of this case.

In light of the fact that the defendant prepared a written confirmation to the effect that "the right to collateral security of this case is for litigation with the higher clan and is not prejudicial to the victim's clan" after the loan was actually made, the F's above statement is credibility.

In addition, F is difficult to deem that the instant right to collateral security was established for its own interest due to the low-income relationship from the establishment of the instant right to collateral security.

F should be deemed to have delivered the content of establishment of a collateral security to the members of the clan to the same purport as the Defendant believed that the collateral security is created only in the form of the instant real estate, which belongs to the Defendant.

In full view of these facts, the summary of the facts charged in this case is that the defendant, the representative director of the LAB, is the victim's clan for the establishment of a collateral security from F of the victim's clan.

arrow