logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.04.26 2017노7829
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Around December 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) leased the 2,3rd floor from H, the owner of K building A to operate the relevant child and hospital; (b) leased the 1st floor; and (c) transferred all of the expenses, such as rent to be borne by the Defendant by the Defendant while subleting the lease to the victim D; and (d) from the pharmacy to the pharmacy, the Defendant would obtain unjust profits, such as receiving the sales proceeds of medicine according to the number of insurance claims; and (c) purchased the 1st floor at the pharmacy with the condition of moving into the hospital, on or around December 25, 2013, the Defendant provided that H purchase of the 1st floor from the pharmacy with the condition of moving into the hospital, on condition that the 5,000,000,000,000 won, monthly rent, KRW 12 million, year 2, and year 5.

On December 14, 2013, before the Defendant leased the first floor from H, the Defendant subleted the first floor of KRW 150 million on the condition of guaranteeing re-contract between KRW 180,000,000 per month, monthly rent of KRW 180,000,000, contract period of KRW 2 years and year 5 years, and the Defendant paid the victim the amount of KRW 40,000,000,000 to KRW 40,000,000 and KRW 2,000,000,000,000, such as subsidies for the installation expenses of KRW 40,000 and KRW 15,00,00,000,00 to the Plaintiff.

In addition, this hospital is trying to operate for the five years in the future, but since (H) the house owner who resides in the Tong Young-gu and became aware of the fact that the party entered the first floor of the sub-lease and paid the premium, it is necessary for the victim to pay the premium for the premium, so it is unreasonable for the victim to do not end for the premium." The defendant would operate the hospital for five years and guarantee the sales of the first floor pharmacy for the period, and the existing facilities of the first floor pharmacy are believed to have been paid by the defendant, and on the same day from the victim.

arrow