beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.
Reasons
Criminal facts
[2019 Highest 747]
1. On August 11, 2016, the Defendant, at a studio in which the Defendant was residing in Chungcheongbuk-B, was aware of the victim C’s old age with a relationship of interest with the victim C, and, at the same time, “B is the former prosecutor’s origin and the main business is the construction business. It is not sufficient funds to purchase the land of the Republic of Korea, Y-si D. When the real estate development business is completed, there is a lack of funds for real estate development business by purchasing the land of the Republic of Korea.” As a former prosecutor, the Defendant is carrying out a real estate development business as a former prosecutor, and the Defendant took a view that the borrowed money would be repaid properly.
However, the defendant was not a former prosecutor, and he did not directly purchase the above land or promote the real estate development project, and there was no certain revenue or property, and there was no intention or ability to repay the money, even if he borrowed money from the victim because he was able to use it in the repayment of some debt.
Around August 11, 2016, the Defendant received KRW 5,000,00 from the victim to the account of community credit cooperatives in the name of the Defendant and received KRW 260,660,000 from that time through the same method, from September 10, 2018, totaling KRW 47 times from that time to September 10, 2018.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.
2. On January 1, 2017, the Defendant, in front of the victim C’s house located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, took a large amount of entertainment expenses, gift expenses, oil expenses, etc. for real estate development projects to the victim, saying, “If the card is lent, it will be paid back at a time after the completion of the project later,” and the Defendant showed an attitude that he would have paid the card amount properly.
However, in fact, the defendant did not directly promote real estate development projects, did not have certain revenues or property, and used carded by the victim.