logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2012.08.31 2010고합655
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case

A. A. The Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) established C Limited Corporation for the purpose of apartment development in the People's Republic of China (hereinafter "China"), around May 14, 2004, for the same-sex zone (hereinafter "China"), and there was a lack of funds while carrying out three new construction projects and one remodeling projects at the time, and there was a lack of funds from (i) E representative director F, and (ii) G representative director H.

On April 2006, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim F and H that “The victim F and H are undertaking three new construction works and one remodeling works of D apartment units at the time of China for the sake of China. It is anticipated that more than KRW 40 billion will be made. If US$ 1700,000 is invested, the Defendant would pay KRW 4 billion including the principal within one year from the date of the payment of the investment amount. The Defendant would prepare a sales contract for 40 households of apartment units as security, and if 4 billion won is not paid within one year, it would be able to acquire ownership only if it is reported to the country of Busan for the sake of the mobility of China.”

However, under the circumstance that the defendant was running a new apartment construction and remodeling project only with a loan or loan, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay 4 billion won to the victims within one year, and there was no intention or ability to provide the victims with a collateral for 40 households, which are provided as collateral to the victims. In addition, five households (1401, 1707, 1903, 2003, 2101, 2101, 30 households as stated in the attached list of crimes, were scheduled to dispose of money before receiving money from the victims, and there was no intention or ability to provide a collateral for 4 billion won because it was intended to sell 30 households as listed in the attached list of crimes to others or to use it as collateral for a loan from a bank.

As such, the defendant deceivings the victims and belongs to them.

arrow