logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.09.20 2018고단392
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, “2018 Highest 392,” who runs a construction business company E, came to know with the victim’s mother, at the request of the victim, to build a house to be residing by the victim’s mother.

1. On March 28, 2016, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would have changed the expenses to be incurred in the test to install a brick on a house built by the mother of a party in the process of construction” to the victim at an influent place within the Danan-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

However, in fact, the Defendant had been in excess of his/her obligation by failing to pay KRW 200 million for the obligations related to the construction project at the time, and was thought to use the money received from the injured party for the purpose of repaying obligations related to the construction project, paying living expenses, etc., so even if receiving the money from the injured party, there was no intention or ability to install the wall as above.

Nevertheless, the Defendant deceiving the victim as above and transferred KRW 10,000,000 to the bank account in the name of the Defendant’s East H used by the Defendant on the same day from the victim.

In addition, the Defendant, from around that time to April 26, 2017, by deceiving the victim as shown in the list of crimes in attached Form 2, and by receiving a total of KRW 198,000,000 through nine times.

2. Fraud and the Defendant in violation of the law, around September 23, 2016, would receive compensation money from the victims of land expropriation in relation to the site to be expropriated as a road at a non-place within the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

In this process, it was false to the purport that the farmland division, construction division, roads and public officials of the Taean-gun Office should make a solicitation, and the false statement to the effect that it is necessary to pay school expenses.

However, the defendant thought that he received money from the injured party at the time to use it for the purpose of repaying obligations related to the construction project and paying living expenses.

arrow