logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.01.09 2017고단3605
사기
Text

The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. On June 15, 2014, the Defendant, together with the facts charged, stated that “In active restaurants located in the Seogdong-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Seonam-si, the Defendant would have the right to purchase a Dmiscellaneous store and will supply D articles to the victim C. The acquisition of E, F, G, and H is underway, and will be completed within three months and be newly opened. If the Defendant invests KRW 150,000,000,000, the Defendant will grant the right to operate one store among the above four stores within three months, and will make KRW 3,00,000 each month before obtaining the operating right.”

However, at the time, the Defendants did not have the funds to receive the stores by themselves, and if they did not borrow money from the investors such as the victims, they could not normally proceed with the acceptance. Since there was no person who is definitely planned to make an investment other than the victims, even if they borrowed money from the victims, they did not have the intent or ability to grant the right to operate the stores within three months or to guarantee the 3,000,000 won per month prior to the commencement of the store.

Nevertheless, as above, the Defendant and B received KRW 150,00,000 on June 27, 2014 from the victim’s account in the name of the Defendant, and received KRW 50,000,000 on July 10, 2014, and KRW 150,000 on July 50, 2014, respectively.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired 150,000,000 won from the victim jointly with the victim B.

2. In light of the following facts or circumstances inferred from the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, has received money from the beginning by deceiving C with the criminal intent of defraudation, and there is no other sufficient evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

(1) B was well aware of the progress of the project, etc., and directly C is the same as the facts charged.

arrow