logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 해남지원 2017.10.11 2017고합16
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
Text

The defendant dismissed an application for compensation filed by the applicant for compensation.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the person running E Co., Ltd. in South Korea.

On November 26, 2010, the Defendant completed the construction work and received a change in the construction cost, if the victim C lent 20 million won as material cost, etc. falls short of the construction cost to the victim of G Scki operated by the victim C in F in the South-Namnam-gun of the Republic of Korea on November 26, 2010

“.....”

However, in fact, even if the national tax that the above company did not pay at around 2010-2000,000 won was not paid by the above company, due to the lack of funding, the Defendant paid national taxes first, and paid the existing debts. On June 2013, the amount of national taxes that the above company did not pay at around 150 million won, and the amount of bills that are to be collected and collected under the above company’s name was approximately KRW 200 million, and KRW 450,000,000,000,000,000 won, and thus, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the total amount of the borrowed money even if it was borrowed from the injured party.

Defendant deceptioned the victim as above and received 20 million won in cash from the victim, i.e., from the victim, to December 19, 2013, and acquired 814 million won in total from the victim through 85 times in total, such as the list of crimes in the attached Table, from the time to December 19, 2013.

2. While the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion in the attached list of crimes, the Defendant borrowed the sum of KRW 364 million from the sum of KRW 1,488,69, and the sum of said KRW 80,000,000 from the sum that the victimized person transferred to the account of the Defendant and E company to the account of the Defendant or E company and the damaged person paid in cash to the Defendant, the Defendant did not borrow the remainder from the damaged person in cash, and the Defendant had no intent and ability to pay the remainder at the time of borrowing money from the damaged person.

3. Determination

A. The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial.

arrow