logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.07.17 2013고단1592
사기
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Around September 19, 2006, the Defendant made a false statement on the part of the charge that “Around September 19, 2006, the Defendant would sell the stone coming from the construction site and make a profit to 500 won per 1 cubic meter of the 150,000 square meters if the Defendant invested KRW 30,000,000 in a total of 150,000,000,000,000 won for the construction site.”

However, in fact, the Defendant received the above investment money for the repayment of debts in excess of debts, the C site was not suitable for the collection of stone, the sales place of stone to be collected was not determined, and the sales place was determined.

Even if the terms and conditions of sales are identical to each other, he/she will receive 300 won per 1 cubic metres from Youngbu Co., Ltd., a supplier, which is a supplier. This is because the 500 won per 1 cubic metres agreed upon with the first victim was sold insufficiently, so even if he/she received money from the victim for the purpose of investment, he/she did not have any intent or ability to pay the principal and profits.

As such, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as such; (b) received total of KRW 21 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of the Defendant, on September 23, 2006; (c) KRW 500,000,000 on October 27, 2006; (d) KRW 300,000 on November 30, 2006; (e) KRW 300,000 on November 14, 2006; and (e) received KRW 21,40,000,000 from the victim as a total of seven occasions, including KRW 30,000 on November 17, 206; and (e) received KRW 7 million on October 21, 2006.

2. The arguments and arguments by the Defendant regarding the conclusion of the judgment, the transfer and takeover of the C site, the construction details of the C site, the construction owner at the Maambdong site, the sale of stone at the Maambdong site, the operation of the Bab Line, etc. are contradictory or uncomfortable.

However, according to the records of this case, the defendant is required to pay the amount stated in the facts charged for the construction cost of the factory site of the (ju) D, Nam-gu, Ulsan-si.

arrow