logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.01.21 2014고단3012
사기등
Text

The defendant shall publicly announce the summary of the judgment against the defendant not guilty.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant: (a) was the husband of F Licensed Real Estate Agent F who operated a licensed real estate agent office in Gyeyang-gu, Incheon; (b) was entrusted with the said Licensed Real Estate Agent Office with the F with the signing of a monthly charter contract on behalf of the lessor of the said Licensed Real Estate Agent Office; and (c) concluded a charter contract with the lessee as if he was delegated with the authority to conclude a charter contract on behalf of the lessor and to receive the charter deposit; and (d) was willing to use the leased deposit for personal purposes, such as business funds, etc. of the Defendant, by arbitrarily concluding the charter contract as if he was delegated with the authority to receive the lease deposit; and (b) the lessee was willing to enter the Defendant’s telephone number in the column of the lease contract with the lessor, etc., and then, (c)

1. Forgery of private documents;

A. On November 29, 2007, in accordance with the above conspiracy of lease contract, F entered into a lease contract with Dtel B (E) on behalf of the lessor with H on behalf of the lessor, with a view to getting out of the scope of delegation of the lessee’s conclusion of the agency contract granted by G and delivering it to the lessee H, by using the computer on the site of the lease contract to the lessee for the purpose of getting out of the scope of delegation of the lessee’s establishment of the agency contract granted by G, and, on January 2, 2008, from January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2009, the lessor’s “G is leased to H without rent to the lessee KRW 25 million without rent from the lessee.” The lessor’s husband’s mobile phone number (I) entered into the lessor’s cell phone number column, and affixed a seal of G voluntarily angled next to G’s name.

As a result, the Defendant, in collusion with F, forged one copy of the lease contract in the name of G, a private document without authority.

In addition, from September 10, 2007 to December 23, 2010, the Defendant conspired with F in collusion with G, J, K, K, L, M, N,O, P, Q, Q, Q, R, T, and U.S. in collusion with F in 38 times in accordance with the foregoing method, as shown in attached Table 1 to 38.

arrow