logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.10.24 2012고정5450
사기
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant: (a) around January 2, 2006, on the 16th floor of the Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 2006, the victim Oral Shipping (States) located in the 16th floor of the building in Mapo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) the Defendant made a false statement to the person in charge of the victim company stating that the victim company “I would pay air fares at the end of the following month if the air delivery is made to the destination designating the original team, including the Philippines, and would pay air fares at the end of the next month,” and that the victim company would have the victim company bear the air fares equivalent to KRW 6,046,040 from that time to May 11, 2006, by failing to pay the aggregate amount of air fares of KRW 53,482,418 in the same way as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table, thereby obtaining economic benefits from the victim company.

2. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing the transaction before and after the crime, unless the Defendant makes a confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do3515, Dec. 10, 2004). In the transaction of goods, whether the crime of fraud by defraudation is established shall be determined by whether the Defendant had the intention to acquire the goods, etc. from the victim by making a false statement as if the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the price of goods to the victim as at the time of transaction, even though there was no intention or ability to pay the price of goods to the victim as at the time of

(1) The following circumstances, which can be seen by the record, are the following circumstances, namely, the Defendant’s operation of the original supply company from November 2003 to the victim company.

arrow