logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.08.25 2016노1640
사기미수
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants did not commit deception since they were loans that the Defendants paid to E by mistake in fact, as stated in the written application for payment order.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (a fine of KRW 3 million for Defendant A, and a fine of KRW 1 million for Defendant B) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On August 21, 2014, the lower court rendered a judgment citing part of the claim of E on the premise that the contract for a self-loan for the building work to be permissible between E and E was concluded, namely, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① a temporary loan agreement and a direct payment agreement between Defendant A and E with respect to the construction work to be allowed in the original judgment; ② a lawsuit was filed against Defendant A regarding the construction work to be permissible; ② a lawsuit was filed against Defendant A for the claim of rent for the temporary installation, in relation to the construction work to be allowed; and the said court rendered a judgment citing part of the claim of E on the premise that the self-loan contract for the building work to be permissible between E and Defendant A was established; ③ Defendant B lent KRW 13.2 million as indicated in the lower judgment to E on February 24, 2014.

The court filed a payment order (Seoul Southern District Court 2014j. 5003) seeking loan payment against E and issued a payment order in accordance with the contents thereof. However, on May 9, 2014, E filed an objection against the above payment order and the decision of rejection became final and conclusive around that time. ④ Defendant B filed a lawsuit claiming re-loan against E on January 13, 2015 (Seoul Southern District Court 2015Gaz. 3943) with respect to the above 13.2 million won (Seoul Southern District Court 2015Gaz. 2015) but the above court ordered Defendant B to lose on June 10, 2015, and Defendant B did not file an appeal, thereby under the same year.

7.7. The above judgment became final and conclusive, and 5. The above 13.2 million won, which can be viewed as a loan, does not exist separately.

arrow