(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.10.23 2014고단1662

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.10.23 2014고단1662

사기등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 2010, from around August 2010 to August 2011, the defrauded Party made a false statement that the Defendant would pay the price for supply when he supplies the species to the Victim B necessary for manufacturing clothes from the “D’s operation in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City.”

However, the defendant did not have any property at the time and did not have any income, and the other companies refused to supply materials so that the victim demanded the supply of the species so there was no intent or ability to pay the price even if the species are supplied by the victim.

The defendant has been supplied with the plant of 4,400,000 won at the market price from the victim during the above period, but did not pay the price.

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

2. On September 30, 201, the Defendant: (a) requested the victim E to process, such as attaching an internal volume of KRW 790,00 to KRW 12,640,00; (b) on February 2012, the Defendant found F Company’s name-free employees and the victim; and (c) on the F Company’s employees seeking to pay the amount to the victim, the Defendant provided that “10,000 won shall be remitted to the victim; and (d) the remainder shall be remitted to the victim.”

around that time, the Defendant received KRW 2,640,00 under the pretext of payment from F Company to the victim, and was in custody for the victim, and embezzled by using it at will around that time.

3. On September 2013, 2013, the criminal defendant against the victim G made a false statement that “The victim G would pay a total of KRW 6,792,00,000 for processing costs, including attaching a 566th load to the victim G,” at the place indicated in the above paragraph (1).

However, there was no particular property and there was no intention or ability to pay the price even if the victim gets out of it due to the default on February 2012.

The defendant.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.05.15 2014노1546

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.06.29 2016고단2597

-대구지방법원 2018.08.21 2018고단23

-창원지방법원 2020.03.25 2019고단3526

-부산지방법원 2020.05.21 2020고단394