logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.10.16 2020노1230
사기
Text

All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. In full view of the circumstances revealed by the evidence of this case, including the following: at the time of the summary of the grounds for appeal, the Defendants’ property status and the victim’s awareness that completion of the construction was impossible from the time of borrowing the money from the victim; the Defendant could be recognized as having failed to have the intent or ability to repay the money from the victim at the time of borrowing the money; however, the lower court determined that the Defendants were not guilty of the facts charged

2. Determination

A. On November 22, 2012, the summary of the facts charged by the Defendants 1 to co-principal in the E office operated by the victim D in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant A falsely stated that “Defendant A shall pay the victim money for four (4) months by selling in lots or selling in lots or selling in lots after four (4) months.” The Defendant B made a false statement to the effect that “I will pay the Plaintiff money after four (4) months by selling in lots or selling in lots by constructing the house for electric source.”

However, in fact, Defendant A was granted a loan equivalent to KRW 250 million to the H association from the victim prior to the lending of money from the victim, and the victim also borrowed KRW 123 million from the victim, and did not pay interest corresponding to each of the above obligations from time to time. Defendant B was not in good economic circumstances, such as not paying the interest corresponding to KRW 340 million under the bad credit standing at the time. The Defendants were to pay the interest corresponding to the H association’s loan and the construction cost that the Defendant had continued to entrust the construction work to G. Accordingly, Defendant A was obliged to pay the interest corresponding to the money received from the victim and the construction cost that the Defendant had promised to pay to the victim.

arrow