logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.10.19 2016고단3242
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Of the facts charged in this case, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, and M.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From July 1, 2005 to July 31, 2012, the Defendant served as a director at a P Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “P”) divided from the above company from May 23, 2006 to July 31, 2012. From January 1, 2013, the Defendant operates R Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”) engaging in the business of manufacturing electronic parts in Q from Gwangju Northern-gu.

[2016 Highest 3242] On May 23, 2006, the Defendant was in trust with the victim N on 30,200 shares of P, and additionally held 46,400 shares under the name of 16,200 shares from December 31, 2010, and was in possession of the remaining 23,200 shares after returning them to the victim.

around December 2015, the Defendant requested the return of shares in the name of the Defendant on the ground that it is necessary to change the name in the process of selling the shares in the process of selling the shares by dividing the electricity business sector P from the damaged party, and the victim transferred shares in the name of the Defendant to the S Co., Ltd. established on July 29, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “S”), but prepared a written contract for transfer of shares in the form of a report on change of the name, and entered into a transfer of shares in the form of a report on change of the name, and received a transfer of KRW 232,00,000 per share from the damaged party on the pretext of transfer of shares to the account designated by the victim. On December 30, 2015, the Defendant entered into an agreement with the victim to return the shares to the account designated by the victim again.

However, since the defendant was suffering from P in a series of processes, he did not have the ability to return the price to the victim as agreed from the beginning, even if he received the price from the victim as the price for acquisition of stocks.

As above, the defendant deceivings the victim by way of taking over the proceeds as if they were immediately returned to the victim, and is deceiving the victim.

arrow