logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2012.01.13 2011고단969
사기
Text

Defendants are not guilty.

Reasons

1. When the Defendants came to know of the fact that E is in possession of the form of the sales contract around June 2007, they conspired to borrow money by deceiving the victim F by using it. Defendant A received two copies of the G apartment sales contract from E at the above temporary border and the French coffee store in the Gyeonggi Pyeongtaek-si B, and transferred it to Defendant B.

Accordingly, around June 15, 2007, Defendant B delivered one copy of the above contract to the victim F at the H restaurant located in Seocheon-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-do, and it stated that “If 20 million won is lent to include money to perform the construction work, 5 additional interest shall be given, and if 20 million won is lent to repay the principal after 2 months, the principal shall be repaid, and if 2 months is not repaid, the apartment shall be sold or sold.”

However, in fact, the above sales contract was made for sampling for the disposal of the sale business, and the buyer and the date of the contract were not entirely stated, and the sales price receipt was not entered in the number of houses and the date of receipt, and there was no property value. The Defendants did not have the intent or ability to repay the above money even if they borrowed the above money from the victim because they did not seek the materials cost from the construction site at their own progress and there was no economic and financial influence, such as undermining funds due to the failure of the Defendants

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired to induce the victim in the above manner, and thereby deceiving the victim from the victim to the Defendant B’s account on June 15, 2007, and 20 million won on June 22, 2007, respectively.

2. According to the statement of the Defendants and the victim, it is recognized that Defendant A asked Defendant B through I to lend money from the victim and Defendant B received KRW 20 million as the facts charged, but the Defendants conspired to acquire the said money by fraud.

arrow