(영문) 창원지방법원 밀양지원 2015.02.26 2013고단316

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 밀양지원 2015.02.26 2013고단316

사기등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[2013 Highest 316]

1. On April 2010, the Defendant stated that “A victim C will return the principal within three months if a company “G” invests 50 million won in the business of aggregate in the south of North Korea, 4 million won per month for one year, and 2 million won per month for the next one year.”

However, the fact was that G Co., Ltd. engaged in aggregate business in South Korea did not produce aggregate, and the Defendant thought that the Defendant would use the aggregate as the price for the purchase of H inn in the military, even if the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim, and made an investment in G Co., Ltd., the Defendant did not have any intent and ability to pay the principal and the profits to the victim.

The defendant was issued a cashier's checks of KRW 50 million at the above office around the 28th day of the same month from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim to take the property by deceiving the victim.

2. On May 20, 2010, the Defendant: (a) stated that the victim D shall return the principal on three occasions within three months, and (b) shall make profits each month for a year, including five million won that the company loaned to B before the company start a aggregate business in the southwest Northwest, at a cafeteria of the J, which was located in the Republic of Korea, G, and I; and (c) that the victim D shall make an investment of KRW 25 million.

However, the fact is that G Co., Ltd., which carries on aggregate business in South Korea, was a company without any production of aggregate. Even if the Defendant was invested in KRW 25 million from the victim, he thought that it would be used for other purposes, such as the repayment of the Defendant’s debt, and investment in G Co., Ltd., which did not have any intent and ability to

At around 31th of the same month from the victim, the defendant is under the name of K in the above office.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2015.12.03 2015노691

-창원지방법원 밀양지원 2015.11.12 2014고단119

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2013.04.17 2012고단2220

-대구지방법원 포항지원 2012.11.22 2012고단916

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2014.03.28 2013고단771