beta
Text
Defendant
A is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months for fraud in the judgment of 2019Da1105, and with respect to each other in the other judgment.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal power] Defendant A was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the Incheon District Court on August 23, 2018 and two years of suspended execution, and the judgment was finalized on the 31st of the same month. On March 29, 2019, Defendant A was sentenced to two years of suspended execution for eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud in the Incheon District Court’s Vice Branch Branch Office, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 6, 2019, and is currently under suspended execution.
Defendant
C On January 12, 2018, in the Incheon District Court Branch of the Incheon District Court, sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) and 2 years of suspended sentence, and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on the 20th of the same month and is currently under suspended sentence.
[Defendant A] around September 9, 2018, Defendant A drafted a contract to sell a knife car with a number of 4,300,000 won with a number of knife to the victim G who purchased a knife vehicle at the International Trading Complex at Bupyeong-si, Bupyeong-si, Busan around September 9, 2018, and said that “the price of the knife is less than that of the knife and the knife for export.”
On September 11, 2018, the Defendant re-entered the above trading complex to take over the said car, and requested the victim to cancel the contract, so that the victim would be able to borrow and borrow another vehicle once again and recover the vehicle, and purchase another vehicle. The Defendant had the victim enter into a contract for the purchase of the KRA car with the victim on September 11, 2018.
However, in fact, the above car was not a car for export, and it was a car for the victim to be unable to sell 4,300,000 won to the victim at the beginning. The defendant, from the beginning, sold another car to the victim at a price lower than the normal market price as if the other car was in a normal market price, and again purchased the said car at a low price.