logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.07.22 2016고단1599
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

"The defendant of "2016 Highest 1599" on March 23, 2010, at D casino in Cambodia, the victim E is currently running online casino business in this hotel, and a lot of profits may be earned.

If 200 million won is invested, 40 percent of the profits will be distributed.

“.....”

However, even if the Defendant received an investment from the injured party, the Defendant intended to use it as money for gambling business, but did not intend to use it as money for online casino business. The Defendant did not have an intent or ability to pay online casino proceeds promised to the injured party because of lack of knowledge about online casino business.

After all, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and received KRW 200 million in total from the national bank account (G) in the name of the defendant Yong-Nam F under the name of the defendant on April 1, 2010.

"The defendant of 2016 Highest 1754" phone call to the victim H at a closed place on April 2010, the defendant lacks funds for preparing online casino business within the country.

B. The loan of money to B will be repaid until August 2010.

“Around May 4, 2010, the Plaintiff received KRW 10 million in cash from the victim’s account in the name of the foreign exchange bank account. Around May 6, 2010, the Plaintiff received KRW 1.5 million in cash from the “K cafeteria” operated by the victim in Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul. Around May 27, 2010, the Plaintiff received KRW 5 million in cash from the said I bank account in the name of the said I and received KRW 33.5 million in total from the Plaintiff around June 18, 2010.

At that time, the Defendant had no knowledge about online casino business and had no ability to carry out the related business. Since from March 2010, the Defendant had already been faced with money, even if he borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to repay the money.

Ultimately, the Defendant.

arrow