logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.04.20 2017고단80
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

To the extent that there is no substantial disadvantage to the defendant's right of defense, the part "on behalf of the defendant" (the 12th sentence of the facts charged as stated in the application for permission of changes in indictment) in the facts charged shall be deleted, and the expression of some phrases among the facts charged shall be corrected, and

On December 2015, the defendant and the victim D bear approximately KRW 10 million against the victim.

On December 3, 2015, in relation to the above debt owed to the victim, the Defendant: (a) delivered the victim with money that he/she would receive and additionally lend to G; (b) delivered the money that he/she would receive from G instead of the money that he/she would receive; (c) had the victim receive a certificate of borrowing KRW 6 million from G; (d) had the victim transfer KRW 2.5 million transferred from the Defendant to G; and (e) around December 5, 2015, at the same place, “I deliver money that he/she would lend to H instead of the money that he/she would lend to H; and (c) had the victim receive a certificate of borrowing KRW 4.65 million transferred from H to H; and (d) had the victim receive a certificate of borrowing KRW 4.65 million transferred from the Defendant.

On March 1, 2016, the Defendant issued a letter of delegation to the victim at “J restaurant” located in G, JA, and issued a letter of delegation to return the above amount of credit to G and H, and paid the victim the amount of credit at the face of the State, with the amount of credit recovered and paid the amount of KRW 10 million top.

However, the fact is that the Defendant removed the above loan certificate, and that G and H obtained the obligee’s letter of loan from the Defendant and destroyed the evidence of the amount of the claim that the victimized person should receive from the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant’s claim against G and H with the above loan certificate and power of attorney.

arrow