logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.07 2015고단7189
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, from October 2012 to D, was operating a personal enterprise with the trade name “D” and was in office as a representative director after establishing D for the purpose of mother and child, clothing, wholesale and retail, trade business, etc. around November 27, 2013.

1. Fraud;

A. The Defendant’s fraud (1) against the victim E may bring a big profit to the victim from manufacturing, bringing in, and selling, Sshacks in China, at the trade in French-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, on March 2013.

It is necessary to pay 50% of the proceeds from the investment of the business fund.

“Along on March 8, 2013, the member was granted KRW 20 million from the injured party, and KRW 10 million from June 14, 2013 to the corporate bank account in the name of the Defendant’s spouse, each transfer of KRW 30 million to the corporate bank account in the name of F, the Defendant’s spouse, and received the same as the funds for his license manufacturing business.

(2) In addition, on June 4, 2013, the Defendant extended funds necessary for the mother and child manufacturing business to the victim on or around June 4, 2013 and paid the principal by paying interest of 4% per month.

“Along on June 4, 2013, the Plaintiff received KRW 20 million from the victim’s bank account in the above F’s name as a fund for mother and child manufacturing business.

However, in fact, around December 2012, the defendant used the above F's real estate as collateral and most of the remaining money used for the mother and child business of 14 million won out of 250 million won and used for the defendant's repayment of other loans, etc. In addition, there was no other property owned by the defendant, and even if the defendant received money from the damaged person as business fund because the business situation of the defendant is not good, he was cut to receive money from the damaged person as business fund, and he was promised to receive money from the injured person by giving priority to the defendant's living expenses or interest on loans, etc. rather than using it as business fund.

arrow