logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.08.26 2016고정130
사기
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 21, 2014, the Defendant: (a) received an order from the head of Mapo-gu Regional Port Office to perform construction works equivalent to KRW 1.5 billion from May 201, 2014 to the victim E, who is the former wife in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon; (b) however, if the company fails to pay a value-added tax, the Defendant would not perform construction works; and (c) would receive a real estate security loan, which is in progress, and complete payment within two to three days.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, the Defendant did not have been ordered by the Masan Regional Port Authority for construction work amounting to KRW 1.5 billion. At that time, the Defendant had been urged to repay the existing debt from the surrounding people without any property, so even if the Defendant received the above loan from the injured party, there was no intention or ability to change it within the agreed period.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim, has used KRW 10 million under the name of the same day from the victim.

G was transferred to the Agricultural Cooperative (H) account in the name of G.

2. On March 20, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim’s house of the victim E, “I and 401, the Defendant was unable to prepare for the production of products, etc., on the ground that there was no funds that the Defendant had been ordered by the Msan Regional Port Authority,” and used KRW 30 million as business funds for the loan of KRW 30 million, and used the previous loan of KRW 10 million for the loan of KRW 10 million until the Haman on June 2014.”

However, the defendant did not have ordered the above construction, and even if he did not have any property and received the borrowed money from the injured party, he did not have the intent or ability to repay it until the promised date.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim, used 30 million won as the borrowed money from the victim on March 25, 2014.

G was transferred to the Agricultural Cooperative (H) account in the name of G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Prosecutions against the Defendant.

arrow