(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.10.25 2019고단2390

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.10.25 2019고단2390

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. From September 6, 2011 to November 24, 2011, the Defendant and the victim B (the age of 47) came to know through the Internet hosting around the year 2010, and thereafter they maintained friendship. Around 2011, the Defendant served as a sales supervisor in Pullet D store located in Pulju-si.

Around July 201, the Defendant was offered a proposal to the victim in Paplet located in Paplet located in Paplet, stating, “When the Defendant entered into a direct contract with the head office with the head office with the content that “8.3% of the total monthly sales should be paid as profits from the head office while operating the store in the name of an individual business operator and as an intermediate management position.” Upon entering into a contract with the head office, profits takes place more than KRW 10 million per month. In order to enter into a contract, there is no money now to pay the deposit amount of KRW 50 million to the head office. If the Defendant borrowed KRW 50 million to be used as a deposit, it would be paid KRW 3 million every month from the date of direct contract with the head office.”

However, even if the Defendant entered into a direct contract with the head office, the deposit to be paid to the head office was merely KRW 20 million, but it was said that the Defendant paid the deposit to the victim, as above, and the Defendant did not have the ability to pay the deposit, since the sum of the second financial rights, third financial rights, and debts to the branch was exceeded KRW 50 million at the time, and the Defendant borrowed money and repaid the existing debt, and thus, the so-called “refluence” was under the circumstance that the Defendant borrowed money and repaid the existing debt, the Defendant did not intend to use the money as personal and living expenses even if borrowed money from the victim, and there was no plan to use the money for the purpose of paying the deposit.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and is under the name of the defendant around September 6, 201.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2018.10.18 2016나9387

-광주지방법원 2017.09.19 2016노4591

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.15 2015고합1081 (1)

-전주지방법원 남원지원 2012.10.23 2012고단347

-서울행정법원 2019.01.10 2017구합80264