logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.11.15 2017고단230
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant, along with C, conspiredd with C to receive money from the victim H for the purpose of securing successful bid price, development costs, etc. for the above E forest land necessary for the progress of the project, while carrying out the project to develop the forest land in Samsung-si, D, E, F, and G as factory site.

Accordingly, C is urgently needed to regard the land as auction at the J office operated by the injured party in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul around July 15, 2013.

The loan of KRW 100 million is short of three months, and even within six months, I want to complete the loan within 100 million.

“A false representation was made.”

However, the defendant and C did not have any special property or income at the time, and the prospect of the above factory site development project is also reliable.

Therefore, there was no intention or ability to repay the borrowed money from the injured party.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and received 94 million won as the loan from the injured party on the same day.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim in collusion with C.

2. From the court of law No. 306 of the Ulsan District Court No. 306 of the Ulsan District Court, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the fraud case against the above court No. 2016 order No. 1975 C on August 22, 2016.

In the above court, the defendant is required to give money to the defendant (C) in the above court.

The question " was asked by the defendant as the previous lending relationship and the money relationship was complicatedly connected to the demand."

The prosecutor's answer that "the defendant was aware that he would lend money to H at the time of giving 80 million won to the witness."

The question “At the time” was asked “I had no knowledge.”

The prosecutor answers "," and the prosecutor's "the defendant borrowed the above money to H because he had known that he borrowed it to H, so the defendant borrowed it to H.

arrow