beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and for one year and two months, respectively.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal power] Defendant B was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Southern District Court on November 23, 2012, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 1, 2012. On May 23, 2013, Defendant B was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Suwon District Court on May 23, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 31, 2013, and on September 13, 2013, Defendant B was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Southern District Court on September 24, 2013.
【Criminal Facts】
around March 2011, the Defendants established E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”) at the place of business of the building C in Sungsung-si, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “E”), which is located in the place of business of the building C, and planned to close and escape from the office after being supplied with the building materials, machinery tools, and industrial supplies by dumping them, and Defendant B took charge of the affairs of receiving and disposing of the goods by taking advantage of the name of “F” as the head of the above E, and Defendant A takes charge of the affairs of receiving and selling the goods by taking advantage of the name of “F”. Defendant A takes charge of the affairs of receiving and selling the goods by taking advantage of the name of “F”. Defendant A takes charge of the said suspect’s acting as the representative director, call with the customer employees
Accordingly, around March 28, 2011, the Defendants entered into a goods transaction agreement with the employees in charge of the victim LA (hereinafter referred to as the “victim”) in charge of the said E office and “the price of goods shall be paid within 10 days after the end of the monthly transaction.”
However, in fact, even if the Defendants were supplied with goods from the victimized company, they paid the goods only one to two times, and made the employees in charge of the victimized company trust the Defendants, and thereafter, they did not have any intent or ability to pay the goods to the victimized company under the above agreement, since they continued to be supplied with the goods, and were able to close the office and escape.
Nevertheless, the Defendants deceiving the employees in charge of the victimized company as above, and their position around May 2, 201 from the victimized company.