logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 포항지원 2017.07.25 2016고단1142
사기등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months, two years of imprisonment with prison labor of Defendant B, Defendant C with prison labor of eight months, and Defendant D, respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On December 11, 2012, Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny, etc. on a short-term of ten months for a short-term of eight months, and completed the execution of the sentence on July 5, 2013.

"2016 Highest 1142 (Defendant A)"

1. On May 4, 2015, the Defendant would provide the victim I with KRW 100,000 per week from a G agency located in the Northern-gu F at the port of port via H through “a person who lends his/her name to open a mobile phone.”

And mobile phone charges will be paid by proxy.

“A false representation was made.”

However, even if the defendant opens a mobile phone in the name of the victim, he did not have any intention or ability to pay the mobile phone fees to another person.

The Defendant, from July 2015 to April 2016, 2016, opened two cellular phones from the damaged party, had the Defendant liable for a total of KRW 2,655,963, including the installment of the said cellular phone from July 2015 to April 2016, and acquired financial profits equivalent to the said amount.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired financial benefits by deceiving the victim.

2. On September 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) lent the name in order to open a mobile phone to the victim J (W, 19 years of age) via the 200,000 won per 10,000 won per 10,000 won, if he/she borrowed the name in order to open a mobile phone.

If so, the fee shall be paid by the agency, and shall be terminated after seven months.

“A false representation was made.”

However, even if the defendant opens a mobile phone in the name of the victim, it was thought that he would dispose of it to another person, and there was no agency to pay mobile phone charges.

The defendant received identification cards, etc. necessary for opening of his/her cell phone from the injured party, and from around September 4, 2015, the same year.

9. From September 2015 to October 2010 of the same year, after opening three mobile phones in the name of the victim at the port and port of port, the sum including the installment of the above mobile phone from around September 2015 to around October 2, 2084.

arrow