logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.06.14 2012고합932
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
Text

The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence against the Defendants is published.

Reasons

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. On December 3, 2009, Defendant A and D stated that “The victim’s representative director (P) at the N hotel coffee shop located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, entered into the T business joint promotion agreement between Q (P), R (State) and three S (State) represented by S (State) around September 2007. Our country has 30% of the construction share of the T business and 50 million won, thereby giving 10% of the construction share of D.”

However, the Defendants, at the time, did not have any intent or ability to grant the victim a share in the construction of the instant project even if they received money from the victim, as the T business (hereinafter “instant business”) was modified to a plan for a private business business by a public-private business operator on August 29, 2008, and around October 25 of the same year, S (State) concluded with Q and R on October 25 of the same year, lost the effectiveness of the Joint Promotion Convention (Conclusion) related to the instant business, which was concluded with Q and R (State).

Nevertheless, the Defendants deceptioned the victim as above and obtained 500 million won as the price for acquisition of the equity in construction from the victim, i.e., the victim.

B. Defendant A and C’s joint criminal conduct 1) around September 7, 2009, Defendant C called the victim’s PP in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government U U U located (in the main office of the victim, “I would like to make a payment by settling accounts from the T business profits if I would not make a payment, and if I would lend 700 million won to the victim, I would like to make a payment in the future.” The Defendant A said that “I would make a payment in lieu of the victim if C fails to make a payment.”

However, at the time, the Defendants did not have any intention or ability to carry out the instant project as above.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired with the above victims.

arrow