logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.05.24 2017고단4847
사기
Text

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal record] On October 27, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for fraud at the Daejeon District Court on March 23, 2018, and the above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

[Criminal facts]

1. On February 2016, the criminal defendant against the victim C shows a contract for land purchase and sale to the victim C at Dadi General Construction Office Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Dodi General Construction Office of Chungcheongnam-nam Budget-gun, with the end of February 3, 2016, and “The sales contract was concluded and the intermediate payment was made, but the remainder of KRW 50 million is insufficient.

I would like to allow the construction of new housing with the permission of multi-household housing after making a balance of money and transferring ownership.

“Around March 4, 2016, from the injured party, was remitted KRW 20 million in total to the NongHyup Bank account in the name of E on March 4, 2016, and KRW 30 million in total to the said Nong Bank account around March 12, 2016.

However, the Defendant had no particular property at the time of borrowing money from the damaged, and the sales contract for the said land was not actually concluded, and there was no intention or ability to have the damaged party complete payment or newly construct a multi-household house on the ground of the above land, because he thought that he would use the money borrowed from the damaged for the purpose of purchase of marina tickets and personal living expenses, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim, thereby deceiving 50 million won from the victim.

2. The criminal defendant against the victim F was willing to borrow money from the victim F, who was a constructor introduced through Chok G, for the purpose of lending money under the pretext of authorization and permission expenses or the balance of land transactions to charge the construction of a new house construction work to the victim F, who was a constructor introduced through Chok G.

A. On July 2016, the Defendant sought five Dongs from the victim in the “I” coffee shop located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, 2016.

It is intended to commission K to work for its original purpose.

arrow