logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2017.09.28 2016고정339
사기등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

C A cooperative head D et al. pretended to sell funeral services to many unspecified people on March 2014, and established a cooperative to collect money from the public who would have been able to gain enormous profits through dividends. D, as the head of the cooperative, has overall control over the operation of the cooperative. E, as the head of the cooperative, as the head of the headquarters and branch office, is in charge of education and lectures against the head of the headquarters and branch office and the head of the team as the head of the cooperative, and F is in charge of establishing a business plan, such as the structure of dividends, and takes charge of electronic and financial management affairs. G is in charge of business presentation at the head office and the branch office as the head office and the national branch office, and the defendant is in charge of managing investors and the branch office as the head of the H branch office.

1. From September 2014 to January 2015, the defrauded Defendant paid 390,000 won to the victim J of H branch on the first 3th floor of the operation of the Defendant, “If the Defendant pays 390,000 won per each unit of the subscription money for the ordinary events, 120,000 won shall be paid for 120,000 won during the first two months, guaranteeing the principal, and paying dividends on 31 occasions during the second two years, and when purchasing goods with 390,000 won, the Defendant paid dividends on 35 occasions in total, such as paying dividends on 120,000 won each two months.”

However, the Defendant did not have any way to pay dividends agreed upon due to the absence of any profits other than the sales price of the goods such as the subscription for investment and the sale price of the goods. Moreover, the Defendant was aware that, as long as a new investor is not confined, it would have been able to pay the agreed high-rate dividends to the members of the cooperative, the Defendant would have been able to pay the principal and the agreed dividends to the victim.

arrow