logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.20 2017고단3312
사기등
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B On August 24, 2016, at the flood control point, imprisonment with prison labor for six months and one year of probation was sentenced to a crime of fraud, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 1, 2016.

1. The Defendants’ relevant Defendant A is the wife of D, the owner of the 103 Dong-dong 302 (hereinafter “the instant studio”) located in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, and Defendant B, among the police officers on January 2016, who became aware of Internet NAV loan Kafol, attempted to borrow the instant studio in her husband D’s name as security, and her husband went to the end.

Defendant B asked to the effect that “the intention is different,” and Defendant B knowingly knew that Defendant A intended to borrow money as security without the delegation or permission of D, the owner of the studio of this case.

2. Defendant B sent the address, photograph, etc. of the studio of this case to E, which was known through the Internet NAV real estate-related car page on January 2016, 2016, as seen above, and Defendant B’s joint crime committed by the Defendants, as if he were D, who was the owner of the studio of this case. “A lending KRW 80 million on the condition that the studio of this case is set up a right to collateral on the studio of this case.” The reliance upon the consent of E, contact the Defendant A to prepare documents, such as the head of the D’s seal impression necessary for the establishment of the right to collateral security of the studio of this case, identification card, registration certificate, and certificate of seal imprint.” Defendant A consented thereto.

A. On February 5, 2016, Defendant B made a phone call to the above E and made it false to the effect that “I will use a provisional contract with the necessary documents instead of Party A,” and Defendant A was only the owner of the instant studio in the context of coffee near the Seoul Central District Court’s registration in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Central District Court.

D Formulate a contract setting up the right to collateral security of the studio of this case owned by D with money in the name of D.

arrow