logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2013.10.24 2013고단1398
사기등
Text

The punishment of the accused shall be set forth in six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 2010, the Defendant: (a) stated that, within the Defendant’s passenger car parked in front of the Ejuk point in the operation of the Victim D (hereinafter “C”) located in Manpo-si, Mapo-si; (b) that, “If the Defendant borrowed KRW 40,000,000,000 from the purchase fund of the purchase fund of the purchase fund of the purchase fund of the purchase fund, the Defendant would have the Defendant paid the payment immediately as the sale profit accrued.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to purchase misleading language and did not have any intention or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the victim because there was no particular income.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 40 million from the victim as the borrowed money on the same day, and acquired it by fraud.

2. Fraud of insurance loans terms and conditions;

A. On June 27, 2011, the Defendant: (a) called the victim corporation Dongbu Fire and Marine Insurance Call Center; and (b) called the victim corporation; and (c) requested a call center counselor to file an application for a loan of the insurance terms and conditions under the said D name.

However, in fact, the above women were not above D, and the defendant did not have been approved by the above D to get a loan of insurance terms and conditions.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the counselor of the call center, who is an employee of the victim, received KRW 1790,00 from the victim to the above ACF account, and acquired it by deceiving the above D’s insurance terms and conditions.

B. On December 27, 2011, the Defendant applied for a loan of insurance terms and conditions under the said D’s name to the call center counselor of the same fire and marine insurance company, the victim, as he/she obtained the consent from the above D at the place of fluence.

However, in fact, the defendant did not receive insurance policy loan from the above D.

As above, the Defendant deceptioned a counselor at the call center, who is an employee of the victim, and was affiliated therewith, to the said AFC Account from the victim.

arrow