logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.05.21 2014고단2355
사기
Text

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Central District Court on February 13, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 21, 2013. On April 29, 2014, Defendant A was charged with non-detained for special larceny and continued in the first instance trial.

Defendant

B On December 27, 2012, the Daejeon District Court sentenced two years of imprisonment for fraud, etc., and the said judgment was finalized on August 12, 2013.

【Criminal Facts】

The Defendants set up a master office of “H” in Gangnam-gu Seoul, and employed I, J, and K as employees, and offered money to the victims who wish to obtain a loan through the “TM marketing” office, and make a false statement to the effect that “I will open a mobile phone and maintain the name of a customer for three months, and will transfer the mobile phone name to another person if the loans are repaid three months thereafter.” The Defendants collected all documents necessary for the opening of the mobile phone in the name of the victims, including an application for subscription to the mobile phone in the name of the victims, seal impressions, certified copy, identification cards, copies of identification cards, and records of the cell phone sales, and then conspired to purchase the above mobile phone from the victim without changing the owner of the mobile phone, even if the above mobile phone owners redeem all of the loans, and then acquire the profits therefrom.

Upon receipt of the Defendants’ instructions, I, J, and K promised to deliver all of the personal information of the above loan applicants and the cell phone opening documents to Ma and his employees, who are L business owners, through the Messen, and to pay 3-40,000 won per cell phone under the pretext of opening fees.

The Defendants, in collusion with I, J, and K on April 13, 2012, by deceiving the victim’sO from the TM office as above, I, J, and K with an application for mobile phone membership, a certified copy of resident registration, and a sound recording file collected from the victim’sO.

arrow