logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.10.12 2018고단2755
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 3, 2018, the Defendant, along with his/her nameless scaming staff, committed a false act, such as putting a phone to many and unspecified persons, misrepresenting the investigation agency and the staff of financial institutions, with the intention of receiving money and obtaining money from the Defendant.

1. On July 5, 2018, a staff member of the former Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office C in charge of the former Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office, when she puts a telephone from the victim’s cell phone to the victim’s cell phone on July 5, 2018 as his/her inspector, at around 12:11, 2018;

It was a false statement that it was a crime that had been established in the name of the party and the Handphone, so all of the cash in the new DNA bank passbook was withdrawn and delivered in the future of the Daejeon E branch.

At that time, the Defendant received the order from the said employee of the said Defendant to receive the victim money from Daejeon as well as from the said employee of the said employee, and around 17:00 on the same day, the Defendant met the victim before the E church located in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, and was given 28 million won in cash from the victim, who was an employee of the Financial Supervisory Service.

As a result, the defendant, in collusion with the staff of phishing in collusion, deceiving the victim, thereby deceiving 28 million won.

2. On July 6, 2018, a staff member in charge of the singing of the name of the crime committed at around July 6, 2018, at around 09:07, July 6, 2018, the victim G’s cell phone called with the victim G’s cell phone and carried out as if he/she was his/her prosecutor; “H prosecutor of the Seoul District Public Prosecutor’s Office;

The Supreme Court made a false statement that the passbook was created in the name of the party and the complaint was filed, and it is currently a suspect, and it will be replaced to a victim, and if the cash in the new passbook is classified as an administrative asset and the bank is in the impossible to make a transaction in the passbook, it would recover the passbook.

At that time, the Defendant received the order from the said Defendant to receive the victim only from the said Defendant’s employees of the said Defendant’s name in return for Daegu, and around 17:03 on the same day.

arrow