(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.01.19 2014노489 | 리걸엔진

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 2015.01.19 2014노489

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

1. Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. A. Around September 6, 2012, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant connected the “D” office located in Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-si to “E”, which is the site of arranging the sale and purchase of cargo vehicles; (b) up to 4 times a week, 3,000 won a week, 5,280,000 won a month, 5,220,000 won a month, and 5,00,000 won or more a month; and (c) the Defendant was contacted by the Victim F to purchase the said cargo vehicle (hereinafter “instant cargo vehicle”).

Accordingly, the defendant made a false statement to the victim that "the defendant has entered four times a week in a fixed tri-electronic, and 330,000 won per time. In addition, it is guaranteed that the defendant's monthly sales is equivalent to KRW 8,500,000,000 as he/she has priority to enter a draft or a pressal event."

However, in fact, the freight of this case was not entitled to 4 fixed delivery every week to Samsung Electronic, and even if the freight of this case was sold to the victim, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to guarantee the net income of 8.5 million won and 5.5 million won.

Nevertheless, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim and had the victim receive KRW 65 million through H, an operator of the above Internet site on the same day.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the judgment of the court below, it is acknowledged that there are some facts as to the number of times the defendant can supply the instant cargo, among the advertisements posted through H, to Samsung Electronic. However, it is difficult to recognize that the defendant deceivings the victim (all actual transactions were conducted by her husband I) as to the instant cargo, which is the subject of the transaction, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, the following circumstances recognized by each of the above evidence, i.e., the Defendant’s objection from the J that was delegated by the former borrower.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2014.01.15 2013고단2148

-인천지방법원부천지원 2016.10.18 2015가단27769

-서울북부지방법원 2017.02.15 2016가합20293

-서울동부지방법원 2017.08.23 2016가단125461

-제주지방법원 2017.04.21 2016가단54468