logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.07.19 2017고단955
사기등
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 2014, the Defendant purchased a motor vehicle under the name of the Defendant by means of an automobile installment loan under the name of the non-sicker, who introduced himself as a lending agent for the Haman, and immediately collected the purchase price of the motor vehicle by selling it.

1. On September 30, 2014, the Defendant, along with the above name Buddhist boxes, purchased DNA strawing vehicles at the automobile C agency located in the Si of Mapo-si in Gyeonggi-do around September 30, 201, and showed an attitude that the Defendant would normally operate the automobile purchased with the intent to obtain the loan and pay the installment payments normally and normally by presenting the Defendant’s business registration certificate prepared with the intent to obtain the loan, with the amounting to KRW 27,70,000 as principal principal, KRW 60,00, interest rate of KRW 7.5% per annum, and the rate of interest rate of KRW 634,790 per month.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay the loan even if the Defendant received installment financing loans from the victim company, by selling the vehicle to the non-persons without a name, and making an application for the above loan in order to receive the payment for the loan from the non-persons without a name.

Nevertheless, the defendant, in collusion with the above name in order to mislead the victim, and caused the victim to pay 27,700,000 won to the automobile corporation under the pretext of installment financing, thereby acquiring property profits equivalent to the same amount.

2. The Defendant: (a) purchased Category 1 vehicles with the aforementioned name in return for the time and place specified in paragraph (1); (b) obtained KRW 27,700,000 from the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd.; and (c) concluded a mortgage agreement with the victim as a collateral to cover KRW 27,70,000 with the value of the claim that the mortgagee as the mortgagee.

Nevertheless, it is not appropriate.

arrow