logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.03.08 2018고단6814
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From around 2015, the Defendant was a person who had been in a relationship with B from around 2015, the victim C is a mother of B, and the victim D is a kin of B.

1. On April 27, 2017, the criminal defendant against the victim C made a false statement to the effect that “The victim was unable to use money to purchase an apartment house to live together with B and marriage at the same time,” and that “the victim would pay interest at KRW 500,000 per month after the second month of the payment of apartment payment if he/she borrowed money.”

However, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, it was thought that it was used as the name of the Defendant’s debt repayment rather than apartment intermediate payment. At that time, there was no particular property or fixed income, and there was no intention or ability to repay the money to the victim because the Defendant bears the loans of financial institutions equivalent to KRW 42 million in total and the obligation to borrow money to the branch.

Around April 28, 2017, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 10 million from the victim through the G bank account in the name of the Defendant from the G bank account in the name of the Defendant.

2. On April 2017, the Defendant against the victim D, at the same place as the above paragraph 1, at the lower police officer, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D to the effect that “It is insufficient to purchase an apartment house to live together with B when married with B, and to use it as an intermediate payment. If the Defendant borrowed money, he/she would pay the interest KRW 100,000 per month after using it as an intermediate payment for an apartment.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, he was thought to use it as the name of the defendant's debt repayment rather than the part payment of apartment, and there was no intention or ability to pay the money to the victim as provided in the above paragraph (1).

The Defendant, as above, deceiving the victim and deceiving him from the victim on May 10, 2017, G Bank under the name of the Defendant.

arrow