beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. On February 23, 2009, the Defendant against the victim C was running a landscaping company under his/her own name, and the occurrence, such as failure to pay value-added tax, etc., has increased, and the Defendant retired from office. From February 23, 2009, the Defendant was aware of the victim C during the period in which he/she was running a landscaping company under the name of E in his/her own name, and the victim C was aware of the period during which he/she was running a taxi driving.
On April 16, 2010, the Defendant stated that the Defendant would pay KRW 23 million including interest until June 30, 2010, in the H office where the victim in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City is working, that the Defendant would pay KRW 20 million to the victim of the H office.
However, on February 5, 2010, the Defendant bears the obligation of KRW 50 million at the time, such as borrowing KRW 15 million from Hyundai Capital Capital on February 5, 2010, and even if the Defendant borrowed part of the money from the victim to use it as cost of living, there was no intention or ability to repay it.
The Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim as above, received from the victim the delivery of KRW 10 million on April 16, 2010, KRW 7 million on the 28th of the same month, and KRW 20 million on the 30 million on the 30th of the same month by using the bank passbook in the name of business bank account in E’s name.
B. Around May 20, 2010, the Defendant, at the same place as the above “A” around May 20, 2010, shows a large number of tax invoices of April 30, 2010 to the victim (supplier, “F,” “F,” “I,” “97,750,000 won” and “I,” and “the supply price of KRW 97,750,00,00,000,000 are borrowed from the construction site. As such, it is necessary to borrow KRW 20,000,000 from the loan without a mold until June 30, 2010, repayment of interest accrued thereon with KRW 20,000 and KRW 20,000,000,000 newly borrowed by July 30, 2010.
The term "assumed" was referred to.
However, in fact, the tax invoice of April 30, 2010 presented by the defendant was prepared by the defendant at will, and ( state) I was prepared by the defendant at will.