logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.10.13 2017고단1465
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

An application for compensation by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On May 28, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act at the Cheongju District Court, and completed the execution of the sentence at the Cheongju Prison on November 7, 2014.

[2017 Highest 1465]

1. On December 1, 2016, the Defendant against the victim D, at the life parking lot of the Gu, Cheongju-dong-dong-dong-gu, Cheongju-si, the Defendant would purchase the victim D with the opportunity to purchase the home appliances at a price of 1/3 of the market price of the city when purchasing the home appliances through her friend-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong.

“False speech was made to the effect that it was “.”

However, the fact was that there was no friendly tool working in Samsung Electronic in the defendant's friendly life, and it was not possible to purchase home appliances at a premium, and it was intended to receive money from the injured party to use them for personal purposes such as living expenses.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received cash of KRW 100,000 from the victim for the same day as the purchase price for the household appliances on the same day.

In addition, from that time until February 25, 2017, the Defendant obtained a total of KRW 3,420,000 from the damaged person in the same manner as shown in the attached crime sight table 1 from that time to that of February 25, 2017 and acquired it by fraud.

2. On June 23, 2016, the criminal defendant against the victim E made a false statement to the effect that “A pharmacy is operated in a Cheongju, with a large number of operations at the Cheongju, and a pharmacy is to be repaid after one month from the pharmacy’s profit.”

However, since the Defendant was not a pharmacist, the Defendant did not have operated a pharmacy, and only tried to use money for personal purposes, such as living expenses, from the damaged person, and there was no particular property or income from the damaged person.

arrow