logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.03.26 2013고단6174
사기
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) on May 23, 2012, the Defendant filed a lawsuit (2012Gadan16871) against the Ulsan District Court and the victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) with the Ulsan District Court located in Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-dong, 635-3 (hereinafter “D”); (b) on November 16, 2012, the said court concluded that D would pay the Defendant KRW 12,80,000 as dividends until January 15, 2013; and (c) around February 21, 2013, D would receive KRW 8,940,000, which deducted the settlement amount from D’s dividends.

Nevertheless, on February 22, 2013, the Defendant, based on the authentic copy of the above executory protocol of mediation, had a claim of KRW 12,800,00,000, based on the above executory protocol, by deceiving the above court by filing an application for the seizure and collection order (2013TT 1531) against the obligor and E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) as the third obligor. On March 14, 2013, the Defendant was paid KRW 12,80,000 from E around March 28, 2013.

Accordingly, the defendant was granted the victim's property by deceiving the court.

2. The Defendant asserted that, around February 21, 2013, KRW 8,940,000 deposited from D to the Defendant’s account, the Defendant applied for this case’s seizure and collection order without knowing the deposit. The Defendant’s above money deposited from D cannot be deemed as a repayment of KRW 12,80,000 as stipulated in the instant conciliation protocol, and thus, there is no lawsuit fraud’s criminal intent and deception at the time of application for the seizure and collection order.

3. Determination

A. A litigation fraud is an offense involving acquiring the other party’s property or pecuniary advantage by deceiving the court and obtaining a favorable judgment against himself/herself. The punishment of such a crime is inevitable to bring about a chilling of the civil trial system that any person may make a favorable assertion to himself/herself and receive a remedy through a lawsuit. Therefore, the defendant recognized such a crime.

arrow