logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.12.19 2013고단2144
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Around March 2013, the Defendant issued an order to sell and pay the said merchandise coupons, if he/she delivers the merchandise coupons 10,000 won of the merchandise coupons, 4, 30,000 won of the merchandise coupons, 30,000 won of the merchandise coupons, and 6 merchandise coupons of the shopping cultural merchandise coupons to the merchandise owner team of the injured party BGF test (hereinafter “victim company”) at the convenience store in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Busan, where the Defendant worked as the store.

However, in fact, when the defendant came to know that when ordering a merchandise coupon with a high exchange nature to the victim company, he/she provided a merchandise coupon for sale without any confirmation or control procedures, he/she arbitrarily ordered the merchandise coupon for sale, and he/she did not have the intent or ability to pay the price after selling the merchandise from the above convenience store as the goods to the victim company.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received a total of KRW 13,160,000, total market price of KRW 240,000,000 from the victim company at that time, and acquired the total of KRW 13,160,00,00 from around that time to July 2013, as shown in the separate crime list, from around that time, the Defendant acquired the total of KRW 13,160,00 from the victim company.

2. On August 2013, in order to seek an agreement on the crime described in paragraph (1) of this Article, the defrauded of the victim E: (a) posted a notice of a loan on the Internet portal site in order to seek the agreement, and then conspired to obtain the above names of the victims and smartphones by accepting a proposal to the effect that “to pay money to purchase and transfer smartphones.”

The Defendant conspireds with a person who was in bad name, and in the “G” mobile phone agency operated by the victim E on August 9, 2013, the Defendant was the person who was in bad name at the time of fact.

arrow