beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment of 10 months, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won, respectively.
Defendant
B The above fine shall not be paid.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is a person who has been in operation as the representative director of the Dispute Settlement Co., Ltd. which was established for the purpose of interior wholesale business, and on November 10, 201, Defendant B was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten years for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on October 10, 201, and on December 6, 2013, a person who was sentenced to imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on July 201 and the execution of the sentence was completed on the same day, and served as the head of the office in charge of the business and design affairs of the said company.
If the Defendants are tending to make an investment in the apartment complex in the name of the model model model, the apartment house, and made an investment, they are willing to pay 2% of the sales amount every month from the occupants of the apartment complex, or to deceiving another person to return the principal within 2 weeks from the expiration or request of the contract.
1. On July 4, 2015, the Defendants: (a) around 11:00, in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F and 2-story office; and (b) in the victim D, the victim D moved 1,700 household units in Samsung Yan apartment reconstruction located in Gangnam-gu, Nam-gu; (c) in the said apartment, the Defendant was tending a model model for the foregoing apartment, leading the occupants to be able to be able to go to the Gu, and then implement the interior construction contract.
When investing KRW 50,000,000,000, the principal is to be returned within two weeks when the contract expires or the return is requested, and 2% of the sales amount will be paid every month from the residents of the Gu.
However, at the time of this fact, the KOE did not make profits due to the aggravation of management in the state of the deposit deposit, and even if it received investment from the damaged party with the model registration fee, it did not have the intent or ability to immediately return the investment fund or to pay the sales revenue at the request of the damaged party.
Nevertheless, the Defendants, as above, deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim, are the above company on July 6, 2015.