logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.11.03 2016고단2541
사기
Text

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the above sentence against Defendant B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A from around 1992 to February 2013, 201, a manufacturing company of water and power distribution teams in Kimpo-si operated F. Defendant B was working in the above corporation F from around 2007 to 2011 and established and operated H Co., Ltd., an electrical construction company in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and the Defendants are in friendship with each other.

In the process of issuing and extending a letter of guarantee by the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund, and lending process by financial institutions, the Defendants were aware of whether they are actually traded and the source of using the purchase fund in a formal manner.

Defendant

A, around September 28, 2012, upon receiving a loan from an enterprise bank at the above HF office, he/she immediately revoked the purchase and intended to receive a refund of the loan from the above HH corporation, but, on the Internet, he/she applied for a loan of the purchase fund by entering a written order and an electronic tax invoice stating that “the purchase of goods amounting to KRW 38 million was made from H corporation,” which is a loan program for corporate purchase fund, by accessing the H corporation’s office.” The Defendant B obtained the above order by accessing the above HH H HH website at the above HH corporation office, thereby obtaining the deposit of KRW 38 million from the victim corporation to the H corporation’s account.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. Determination on the defendants and their defense counsel's arguments in the electronic commerce contract, the details of passbook transactions

1. The summary of the assertion is that the Defendants received KRW 38 million through the loan of corporate purchase fund. However, in fact, the goods purchase amounting to KRW 3.6 million was actually made, but the amount was erroneously stated in 36 million.

arrow