logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.05.22 2013고정2445
사기미수
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 5, 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract on the acquisition of the right of lease from G on behalf of the Defendant’s father at the store in Gangnam-3, Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, on behalf of the Defendant’s father, that “G, the transferor, shall be liable for settlement and responsibility of the construction cost related to the remodeling of the said store after the transfer or acquisition of the right of lease from G,” and submitted a written agreement on behalf of F on May 9, 201 to the victim H, thereby obtaining the right to return the excessive construction cost paid after the opening and repair work of the said store.”

Nevertheless, the Defendant received the right of lease from F on April 19, 2012, and then received the right of lease from H on July 30, 2012, the Defendant calculated the excessive amount of construction cost for remodeling of the said store from H Co., Ltd., the Victim H, which received KRW 15,473,029 as the Defendant applied for a payment order to the court in the form of an application for a payment order, and received the said KRW 15,473,029.

Therefore, the Defendant, even though he was entitled to receive the claim for the construction price overpaid from G on November 20, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court applied for a payment order based on the above electronic tax invoice, stating that “The sum of KRW 15,473,029 won and damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served to him,” and sought pecuniary benefits equivalent to the above amount. However, the Defendant attempted to acquire pecuniary benefits by filing an objection against the above payment order on December 10, 2012, but the victim H had attempted to dispute with the above payment order application on December 10, 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including substitution of the suspect);

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;

1. Statement of the police statement to I;

1. Transfer acquisition contracts and written agreements;

1. Payment orders:

1. Investigative Report (State H Statement Hearing), Investigative Report as well as Additional Proof Document.

arrow