logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.05.28 2014노6121
사기
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the summary of the grounds for appeal, despite the fact that the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact of deceiving the victim Aju Capital Co., Ltd. to acquire loans equivalent to the installment of the instant vehicle, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in the instant case.

2. Determination

A. According to the records and arguments of this case, the following facts can be acknowledged.

1) Around July 2011, G living with the Defendant provided a loan consultation with H in order to raise its own business funds, etc., and at the time, H did not fall under the credit loan requirements between the Defendant and G. However, if the Defendant and G purchased two vehicles using two units of vehicles, he/she may provide a loan of KRW 16 million to the Defendant, etc. on the condition that the vehicle is kept as collateral. Accordingly, the Defendant and G agreed to purchase the instant vehicle under the Defendant’s name through H through H and borrowed money. 2) At the time, H would purchase the vehicle through a capital company introduced by him/her to the Defendant, and thereafter, H’s employees concluded the instant loan agreement equivalent to the cost of the vehicle at the same time with the Defendant, along with E and Hyundai Capital’s employees seen as the victim’s employees, and concluded the instant loan agreement with the Defendant to purchase the vehicle by borrowing KRW 16 million and installment.

3) Accordingly, the Defendant borrowed KRW 26 million, which is equivalent to the purchase price of the instant vehicle from the victim, and KRW 20,40,000,000, which is equivalent to the purchase price of another vehicle from Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. 4) However, H kept the instant vehicle, etc. owned by the Defendant as collateral, and arbitrarily disposed of the instant vehicle, etc. from the vehicle siren around August 201. G and the Defendant, who was unaware of such fact, did not know, around October 19, 201, to H, the sum of the borrowed money and its interest.

arrow