logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.15 2015고단3514
사기
Text

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

The application for compensation of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, the representative of D director of the said company (the Defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution at the Seoul Central District Court on November 24, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 16, 2012), and the real estate owned by the victim C (the name is son F, but is actually owned by the victim) to acquire profits by offering it as collateral to G Co., Ltd. in feed manufacturing business, supplying feed as credit, and selling it with feed as credit, and discharging the credit payment.

On June 14, 2010, the Defendant, along with E, from the mutual influences in the vice versa located in the Eup of North Korea on June 14, 2010, the Defendant, along with E, can send the Defendant with the victim approximately KRW 500,000,000 for 35 days and for 45 days to return sufficient money.

In addition, G Co., Ltd. established the right of claim amounting to KRW 190,000,000 for total claim amounting to KRW 190,000 as creditor on the 2nd floor building and site located in the Go Chang-gun, Go Chang-gun, Go Chang-gun, Go Chang-gun, North Korea, and would lend KRW 60,000,000 within the week of the week.

Before the cancellation of the right to collateral security (2) established on the above real estate, G did not receive feed on credit before the cancellation of the right to collateral security (2), and the right to collateral security (2) was false.

However, in fact, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to lend KRW 60 million to the victim in return for the establishment of the right to collateral security to G corporation. Second, the defendant thought that he would be supplied with feed on credit from G corporation before the cancellation of the right to collateral security which had already been established on the victim's real estate. Third, even if he did not have been entrusted with 50,000 maris on the double farm and received feed on credit from G corporation, even if he was supplied with feed on credit from G corporation, the defendant set up the right to collateral security on real estate owned by the victim, such as paying the price later

arrow