logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2015.08.13 2015고단604
사기
Text

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. Around August 13, 2012, the Defendant stated that “A victim E, who operates a waste disposal business entity at the site of D marina Construction in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, is a person who controls and supervises the construction site by being delegated by the owner of the construction site. A person who will pay all waste disposal charges after completing construction around March 2013 at the construction site.”

However, in fact, the Defendant, under the name of the IMD Construction Co., Ltd., was awarded a contract for the said construction and subcontracted the said construction, was planning to avoid the payment of the construction cost by abusing the fact that the construction contract was prepared in the name of the owner of the building in the form of a waste removal report to the competent Gu office, and there was no intention or ability to pay the construction cost even if the Defendant had caused

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) caused the victim to take waste treatment from August 13, 2012 to February 22 of the same month; and (c) did not pay KRW 2,637,000 to the victim and did not acquire the same pecuniary benefit.

In this respect, the Defendant acquired pecuniary benefits by deceiving the victim.

2. Determination:

A. The record reveals the following circumstances.

1. According to the submitted data, it is recognized that the defendant was responsible for and proceeded with the construction work by obtaining delegation or contract from the project owner and obtaining the construction business operator.

However, it seems that the defendant was planned to receive the money from the owner as well as the victim's compensation for construction work for construction business operators such as the victim, and there is no evidence that the defendant has received the money from the owner.

The defendant is the Corporation.

arrow