logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 군산지원 2016.04.20 2015고단400
사기등
Text

The defendant is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of the first 400 order of the second 2015 order or 400 order or by a second 2015 order or 400 order or by a second 400 order or by a second 400 order.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 14, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of four months of imprisonment for embezzlement at the Seoul Central District Court on July 22, 2010 and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 22, 2010.

1. The Defendant against the victim C was in bad credit standing, and there was no intent or ability to carry out a project by acquiring the right to a new project for the construction project of a Dogle Dogle Dogle Dogle Dogle Dog-si Dogle Dog-si Dog-si Dog-si. Therefore, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, the Defendant

On January 15, 2008, the defendant extended KRW 50,000,00 to the victim's (ju) F Office for the operation of the victim in Seoul E. 611 in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, to build a new D. D. Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop 65 households in order to construct a single canal Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop 65 households in the present Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Dop Do, or to return within one week after

“A false statement” was made.

The Defendant, as well as the receipt of KRW 50,00,00 from the victim, from the seat to January 6, 2009, by deceiving the victim as described in the List of Crimes (1) from around that time, and was delivered to the victim totaling KRW 135,183,00 on 19 occasions from the victim to the victim.

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

2. The defrauded G did not have any intent or ability to repay the money even if the Defendant borrowed the money from the injured party on the ground that the Defendant was bad credit standing, there was no particular property or income, and there was no financial institution confirmation of the loan of the building as security, or there was no final confirmation of the loan.

피고인은 2009. 3. 15. 서울 서초구 서초 동 뱅뱅 사거리에 있는 상호 불상의 커피숍에서 피해자에게 “ 석 촌 호수 앞에 있는 1 층 상가 건물을...

arrow