logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2018.08.01 2017도20682
사기
Text

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case

A. The Defendant applied for a loan of KRW 30 million to the Victim Hyundai Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Savings Bank”) via the Internet lending system.

B. On June 16, 2016, the Defendant was examined by telephone from the employees in charge of the victim bank in relation to the above loan, and the Defendant asked questions to other finance companies than the victim bank about whether the applicant for the loan had been applied for the loan, and fraudulently stated that “the applicant did not have applied for the loan at the same time.”

(c)

The Defendant applied for a loan to another financial company from the beginning and applied for a loan of KRW 20 million to the Ethy-friendly savings bank on the same day. At the time, the Defendant bears approximately KRW 68,200,000 per month and the principal and interest of KRW 1.8,20,000 per month, and there was no intention or ability to repay even if the Defendant received a loan from the victim bank.

(d)

As such, the Defendant deceivings employees in charge of the victim bank, and let the employees in charge approve the loan, and received a remittance of KRW 30 million from the victim bank on June 16, 2016.

2. The lower court determined that the Defendant had a relation to the Defendant’s act and the dispositive act of the Victim Bank for the following reasons:

It is difficult to see

In view of the facts charged in this case, the judgment of the first instance court which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged was maintained as it is.

A. At the time of the loan, the Defendant entered important matters, such as his personal and workplace, into the truth.

At the time, the Defendant had income of KRW 2,30,00,000 per month, except for piece rates, and paid KRW 21,561 per month in equal repayment of principal and interest to the victim bank. As such, the Defendant seems to have been able to pay a considerable portion of the loan.

(b).

arrow