(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.07.21 2014고단1230

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.07.21 2014고단1230

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[2014 Highest 1230]

1. On May 28, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C, stating, “The Defendant was delegated with the construction contract right from the building owner to construct a three-story building in the Dong-dong, Ansan-gu, Ansan-si, Ansan-si, Busan-si, which reads that “The Defendant would deduct 10% of the construction cost from the contract fee if he/she lends the construction cost, if he/she would be deducted from the contract fee if he/she lends the construction cost.”

However, there is no fact that the defendant has been delegated with the construction contract right, and there was no intention or ability to repay the construction cost.

As above, the Defendant: (a) around March 26, 2013 from the victim by deceiving the victim; (b) KRW 700,000 from the victim;

4.4.Around 500,000 won;

4.15.Around 15.00,000 won;

5. Around 28.28.20,00 won and a sum of 2.3 million won were remitted to an account in the name of the criminal defendant and acquired them by fraud.

2. On June 28, 2013, the Defendant, on June 28, 2013, displayed the site of the above address D in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, Masan-si, 2013, and falsely stated that “50,000 won of meal expenses to be charged to persons related to the construction work who are allowed to construct on the site”.

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to receive construction works.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 500,00 from the victim to the account under the name of the Defendant on the same day, and acquired it by fraud.

[2014 Highest 2524]

3. On May 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim F that “The Defendant would be entitled to deduct the design cost from the construction cost or the introduction cost after the beginning of the week, because he/she would have paid the design cost to the victim F that he/she would have left the land at the right to construct the land at the right to use the land at the right to use the land at the right to use the land at the right to use the land at the right.”

However, the fact that the defendant had not been awarded the above construction work, and that the defendant has already borrowed expenses, etc. from many people under the pretext that he will be given the same construction work.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.12.24 2014고단2150

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.01.23 2014고정1404

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.04.25 2013고정399

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.06.17 2014고정680

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.08.13 2014고단409