logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.12.21 2018고단546
사기
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment for two years, and Defendant H shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

around January 28, 2010, Defendant A purchased approximately 200 tons of scrap metal generated from the replacement of old facilities of Q fertilizer factories in the PN Corporation. On January 28, 2010, Defendant A purchased approximately 200 tons of scrap metal generated from the replacement of old facilities of Q fertilizer factories in the PN Corporation.

A false statement was made to the effect that “The down payment amount of KRW 45 million is changed” to supply the said scrap metal.

However, at the time of fact, Defendant A was unable to secure scrap metal generated from Q, and even if he received down payment from the victim company, Defendant A did not have an intention or ability to supply the scrap metal to the victim company.

Nevertheless, Defendant A deceiving theO as above and transferred KRW 45 million from the victim company to the R bank account in the name of Defendant A under the same day as the down payment.

As a result, Defendant A was released from the victim company by deceiving theO.

Defendant A is the actual operator of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and Defendant H is the internal director of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd.

On January 5, 2018, the Defendants conspired to sell a factory site to the victim U in the T authorized broker office located in Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, and borrowed the factory site to the V partnership located in Daegu-gu as a security.

The contract deposit shall be used for the purpose of withdrawing the auction on the site of the site, and as the deposit amount of KRW 300 million is deposited in the passbook, it is intended to accept the consent of the cancellation of security from the financial institution.

If an auction is not withdrawn by January 12, the false statement was made that the down payment will be returned.

However, in fact, the Defendants intended to use the down payment received from the injured party as debt repayment, Defendant H’s collection cost, corporate takeover balance, etc. The Defendants’ withdrawal of an auction on the said land due to the lack of deposit in the passbook, and there was no intention or ability to transfer the ownership of the said land to the injured party.

arrow