logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2019.05.02 2018고단2664
사기
Text

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 2015, the Defendant knew that the Victim B was suspended from the business due to the depression of the business, and sentenced the victim B to engage in the door-to-door sales business by lending the victim's name and trade name.

1. On January 1, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement that “The details of the company’s sales on the 2015. Company’s sales exceed KRW 70 million, so it should be purchased data to reduce taxes. If the Defendant borrowed KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant, the Defendant would settle all tax issues and pay it after one year.”

However, at the time, the Defendant, as a person with bad credit standing, was liable for a debt of 60 million won or more, was planned to use the money received from the victim for debt repayment and living expenses, and there was no intention or ability to repay the money to the victim one year after there was no particular profit or property.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was transferred from the victim KRW 20 million around February 16, 2017.

2. On March 2017, the Defendant continued to conclude that “The Defendant would provide the said victim with a loan of KRW 25 million as the duty of taxation is complicated and the additional money is required to be increased, thereby allowing the Defendant to pay KRW 25 million after one year.”

However, as stated in the above Paragraph 1, the suspect did not have any intention or ability to repay the money to the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was transferred from the victim KRW 25 million around April 13, 2017.

Defendant

In addition, at the time of lending money from the victim, the defendant had already lent money to the victim, and returned the money equivalent to the money to the victim. At that time, the defendant had an intention and ability to repay money, while on the part of the defendant, he raised a reasonable profit.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the evidence is examined.

arrow