logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.05.31 2016고단3516
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 24, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment for a violation of the Narcotics Control Act, and three years of suspended execution on October 7, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 7, 2016, and is still under suspended execution.

1. On March 31, 2014, the Defendant purchased EK9 vehicles in the Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan Government D agency located in the Dong-gu, Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Gum-dong D agency”), and the Defendant had a financial institution debt of KRW 1 billion at the time, and the Plaintiff continued to engage in the golf practice hall operated by the Defendant, and thus, even if the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the purchase price even if he/she received the above vehicle purchase price, he/she applied for a loan from the victim K Domp capital Co., Ltd., Ltd. as if he/she would have repaid the loan at the monthly installment, and he/she acquired it by borrowing KRW 62 million from the victim company as a loan for vehicle purchase.

2. On April 29, 2014, when the Defendant purchased HBK vehicles from “G agency” located in Busan Nam-gu, Busan, the Defendant applied for a loan from the victim corporation KF capital loan, even though the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the purchase price even if he/she received the above vehicle, and then acquired it by borrowing KRW 60,40,000 from the victim company as a loan for the purchase of the vehicle, because the Defendant had a financial institution’s debt at the time, and the Plaintiff continued in the golf practice hall operated by the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the purchase price even if he/she received the above vehicle loan.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Submission of a detailed statement of credit information);

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (1) of the Criminal Act for the aggravation of concurrent crimes.

arrow