logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.01.19 2015고단1222
사기
Text

Defendants are innocent.

Reasons

1. Facts charged;

A. Defendant A (1) at around March 21, 2012, at the F legal office office of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan E building 1113 around March 21, 2012, the Defendant seeks to seek a joint business proprietor to borrow a loan of KRW 70 billion with the land and building of H set to the victim G within 10 days.

As down payment, the phrase “a request to 60 million won is made” was false.

However, the fact that the defendant operated a real estate consulting company from around 2011, and did not have any intention or ability to arrange joint business operators for the loan.

The Defendant received 60 million won from the injured party to the post office account (J) in the name of the Defendant on the 22th day of the same month.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

(2) On September 13, 2012, the Defendant would seek a borrower company eligible to receive a loan of KRW 90 billion, which is necessary for purchasing land in Gyeonggi-do from the victim K at the F Legal Office Office of Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, Seoul, within 10 days.

The term "to return money if the borrower does not request the Company" was false.

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to return the above money when he mediates or does not arrange such joint business operators.

The Defendant received from the injured party, i.e., the transfer of KRW 20 million from M to M’s Japanese bank account (N).

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

B. On April 16, 2012, Defendant B stated that “A victim G made a sex loan of 1-Ga at a frequency located in the street in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and made a false statement as follows: “A victim G may have the appraised value per se on the H set real estate as desired by us, so that the appraised value may be lowered to a level of KRW 30 million.”

However, even if the defendant received money from the injured party, he thought that he will be used for his personal purpose, and such an appraisal is given.

arrow