(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2019.11.27 2018고단1562

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2019.11.27 2018고단1562

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four months.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

In September 23, 2019, the amount of damage was adjusted by the prosecutor's application for changes in indictment, and the indictment was changed.

1. Around June 2010, the Defendant against the victim B made a false statement to the victim B, who operates a free product supplier with the trade name “C”, stating that “Any outstanding amount would be settled in the after-sales transaction even if there is any outstanding amount, so the Defendant would continue to supply favorable products at the construction site.”

However, even if the defendant is supplied with glass products, such as signboards, the defendant paid only a part of the price for the goods, and the remaining balance after paying the price for the goods to be paid if the work is completed by supplying the glass products to another construction site, was a plan to supply only a part of the goods necessary for the Corporation, and there was no intention or ability to pay the full price for the goods to the victim.

The Defendant, as indicated in the list of crimes (1) from June 2010 to September 12, 2016, did not pay a total of 80,367,260 won for the supply of glass products, such as visual height signboards, at D construction sites, and acquired economic benefits equivalent to the same amount.

2. On June 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E, who operates the “F” office, stating that “If you send a seal to the construction site, you will pay the price as the end of the construction work.”

However, in fact, even if the defendant is supplied with the seal from the victim, the balance after paying part of the price for the construction, which is proposed to be paid at another construction site, was a plan to continuously pay part of the price to the victim for the work, and there was no intention or ability to pay the full amount of the price for the temporary placement of human resources to the victim.

The defendant is against the victim.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2020.05.25 2019고단1827

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.03.25 2014고단1630

-수원지방법원 2019.01.18 2018가합1271

-서울남부지방법원 2019.09.20 2019고단1281

-의정부지방법원 2014.04.08 2013고단4419