logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.31 2014고단7089
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Criminal facts

1. Fraud;

A. On May 27, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement that, “Around Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 2nd floor, the Defendant would have to pay the victim D the amount of the goods at the Li-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-Se-

However, in fact, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, he/she was thought to use it as repayment of personal debt or payment of employee monthly, there was no intention to remit the money to China as the price of goods, and there was no intention to transfer it to the victim as the price of goods, and there was no ability to repay the interest and principal to the victim due to the cumulative debt of the time.

Around May 27, 2011, the Defendant deceptioned the victim as above, and acquired 30,000,000 won from the bank account in the name of the victim used by the Defendant to the corporate bank account in the name of the victim.

B. On July 201, the Defendant made a false statement at the place indicated in the paragraph (a) stating that “A victim cannot open an account under his/her name when undergoing an investigation into a violation of the Trademark Act, and if a credit card is created, the Defendant would pay the price for the use of the card.”

However, in fact, from around 2012, the Defendant was unable to recover the outstanding amount from the customer, and it was difficult to pay taxes. Since August 2012, it was difficult to operate a factory to the extent that the factory rents are not paid, it was related to paying the material cost, etc. with the above credit card from August 2012 to a refund-free relationship, and even if the Defendant was unable to pay the amount normally even if he was unable to use the credit card of the victim, the Defendant did not notify the victim of the fact that he

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and receives from the victim the SK Card in his name.

arrow