logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.11.11 2014고단443
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 16, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E, who advertised the multiple employees in the “D” office located at P.M., P. on October 16, 2009, and on the “Y.S. T. T.,” stating that “If the Defendant opens a multi-face, he will work as an employee if he/she attempts to prepare for a multi-facel, and later opens a multi-facel, he/she will work as an employee.”

However, even if the defendant receives the advance payment, he did not have the intention or ability to work as an employee from the victim's multiples.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received 4,300,000 won from the Defendant’s National Bank Account (Account Number:F) under the pretext of advance payment from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired the victim's property by fraud.

"2014 Highest 444"

1. On May 18, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victimJ, who is a business owner in the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, the Haak-si, and the 500,000,000 won in total, to the K account, stating that the Ha will work as an employee from the date when the I and the two offices are located.”

However, the above K had the name of the defendant who lent the account to the defendant, and the defendant had no intention to work from the "Hju" to the employee.

On May 18, 2009, the Defendant had the victim transfer KRW 4 million to the Daegu Bank Account of K on May 18, 2009.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. On August 14, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim N, a business owner, “at all times,” the victim N, who is an employee. There has been a house-to-house introduction facility, and the president of the previous establishment has to complete payment.”

However, the Defendant is in fact “Mda”.

arrow