logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.05.18 2016고단835
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 2015, the Defendant introduced the victim I as a member of the Defendant and the victim I, who was the birth of the elementary school, and was attending Hansung Co., Ltd.

Since June 2015, the Defendant retired from the workplace where the Defendant was going in Ulsan (hereinafter referred to as Ulsan) from the workplace and found the job-seeking company, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “the Defendant would make the Defendant be able to be employed in the Han Francation.”

However, in fact, the defendant was not a Korean corporation employee, and there was no intention or ability to have the victim employed in the Korean language, and he was thought to use the money for personal purposes by receiving money from the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received the remittance of KRW 3.5 million under the pretext of deceiving the victim and making a solicitation from the victim of the damage to the Hancheon District Trade Union around July 6, 2015, and received the remittance of KRW 13.5 million from around that time to September 16, 2015, in total, five times from the victim, such as the list of crimes in the attached list of crimes.

2. On February 2016, the Defendant was serving in the planning room of the Korean War Co., Ltd. with respect to the victim J who attempted to commit fraud and fraud in the planning room of the Korean War on February 2, 2016.

The introduction was made.

Since then, the defendant heard that he was unable to get employed by the children who graduated from the university from the side, and made a false statement to transfer money so that he could be employed by the Korean Commercialization test.

However, in fact, the defendant was not an employee in the planning room of the Hando Co., Ltd., and there was no intention or ability to have the victims work in the Hando test, and it was thought that he received money from the victims and used money for personal purposes.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above.

arrow