logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.09.09 2016고단880
사기
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case is Gangnam-gu, Seoul, the Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and the victim C (the 52-year-old-old-old-dong) was buried at the department store store store around January 2013, and the urban planning project was publicly announced as a road site, and thus, the urban planning project is planned to be removed and compensated. If the purchase is made, the Defendant is entitled to take occupancy of the resettlement compensation and long-term rental apartment. The purchase price is KRW 257 million, and the lessee is 40 million, and the house now is 40 million as the lessee is able to live at KRW 50,000,000.

“False speech was made to the effect that it was “.”

However, in fact, E, the owner of the above house, was placed in the unit of KRW 165 million (including the amount included in the lease deposit of KRW 40 million), and the defendant was merely given to E the amount of KRW 5 million in return for preparing a contract with a higher price than the actual transaction price. Therefore, the actual sale price was limited to KRW 170 million.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, obtained KRW 217 million as the down payment from the victim on January 31, 2013, and acquired KRW 87 million equivalent to the difference between KRW 130 million and the actual trading price, excluding the lease deposit, as the down payment, around February 4, 2013, and KRW 16 million, around March 4, 2013.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, the instant house is incorporated into the site of urban planning facilities (road) in accordance with the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government notificationF, and the fact that if the instant project is implemented, the right to occupy the leased apartment special supply site and the receipt of compensation would have been anticipated. ② The Defendant who is the real estate brokerage business entity of the real estate G (the wife E executes a contract with G’s delegation) is the victim of the instant house located in the KRW 160,000 won.

arrow