logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.05.18 2016고단1291
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The National Housing Fund's structure of the fraudulent act of lending money to false workers is operating the system of lending money to workers who lend money to the National Housing Fund at a rate lower than that of the time when applying for a loan with only certain documents such as a certificate of employment, detailed statement of salary, etc. and a charter contract without any special security to stabilize the residence of homeless workers with the financial resources of the National Housing Fund.

그러나 근로자 주택 전세자금 대출 관련 업무를 위탁 받은 금융기관이 형식적인 심사만 하고 대출을 해 준다는 사실을 알고, 대출 브로커들은 허위로 임차인과 임대인 역할을 하는 사람들과 함께 근로자 주택 전세자금 대출금을 가로챌 것을 모의하였다.

Accordingly, loan broscers held false employment-related documents and false details related to a lessee as a person holding the name of the lending, and held false documents to the lessee who will perform the lease. The false lessee, as above, submitted documents related to the falsely prepared employment and the written contract for the lease of housing to the financial institution, and applied for the lease of housing to the employee while applying for the lease of housing, and the false lessor who will perform the lease of housing enters the request of the financial institution to verify the existence of the contract for the lease of housing if the request for confirmation is made as to whether the contract for the lease of housing entered into a contract for the lease of housing, the lessor, who is obligated to perform the lease of housing, applied for the lease of housing,

Specific facts constituting a crime: (a) the Defendant, a false lessee, and a single-person “C” are the lessors, and (b) the Defendant, along with the above “C”, offered loans to workers under the above method; and (c) subsequently offered in sequence to divide them.

According to the above public offering, the above “C” is false to the Defendant, who was the applicant for a loan on July 2013, as he was attending the “E.”

arrow