logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.11.23 2018고단1917
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On July 2014, the Defendant’s fraud against the victim B is necessary to test the victim B, who was a member of the farm in Guro-gu Seoul, where he/she was the head of the management division, in Guro-gu, Seoul, where he/she was the head of the management division.

A false statement was made to the effect that the principal would be repaid at any time if the principal is requested by paying a higher interest on the face of lending the interior cost.

However, in fact, the Defendant could not obtain a loan from a financial institution in excess of the debt limit at the time, and there was no intention or ability to repay the loan even if the Defendant borrowed the money from the injured party.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 20 million from the injured party on July 7, 2014, and continued to receive KRW 4 million in cash, and acquired KRW 20 million by deceiving the victim.

2. On September 24, 2014, the Defendant against the victim E made a false statement to the effect that “G” located in Guro-gu Seoul, Seoul, where he/she was his/her own warden, “The victim E, who is his/her customer, extended 10,000 won interest on the loan of KRW 10,000 per month when he/she lends money to his/her customer E in order to open with 1 and 10,000 won as he/she is urgently required, and the principal shall be repaid by December 25, 2014.”

However, the Defendant could not obtain a loan from a financial institution in excess of the debt limit at the time, and there was no fact that the Defendant intended to open the money. Therefore, even if he borrowed money from the injured party, he did not have the intent or ability to repay it.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received the remittance of KRW 10 million from the victim on the same day.

3. On June 25, 2014, the Defendant’s fraud against the victim H is insufficient for the Defendant to start the BAR in the reverse valley to the victim H who was subordinate to his/her workplace in the said “G”.

. Loaning money.

arrow