logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.10.12 2017고단751
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 20, 2016, the Defendant’s fraud, on April 20, 2016, sent money to the victim C at the mutual infinite chain shop located in the Go-Eup-Eup-Myeon at Yangju-si, to the victim C until April 20, 2016.

The test is an opportunity for only one time.

If investment should not be made, the money will be lent. Whether it is not known to the pene business.

In May, it is possible to receive a loan if only income is reported, so it is possible to pay a loan in five months.

And we do not know the father's knowledge.

He/she shall be fully paid even through his/her father.

A false statement was made that KRW 100 million was only KRW 50,000,000.

However, in fact, the Defendant was in arrears at KRW 28 million, and since the Defendant did not pay the existing loans to the financial institutions of the lending company, etc. from the beginning, it was not possible to pay the money even if he reported income for five months. However, the Defendant did not immediately make an investment in the business but used the victim for overseas gambling funds, and did not have any intent or ability to pay the above KRW 50 million to the victim.

The Defendant deceiving the victim as above and acquired the amount of KRW 25 million on April 20, 2016, and KRW 25 million on April 21, 2016 from the victim to the Saemaul Treasury Account (Account Number: E) in the name of the Defendant designated by the Defendant under the name of the Defendant.

2. On May 30, 2016, pursuant to a promise to pay money for five months as stated in paragraph (1) of May 30, 2016, the Defendant may not obtain a loan due to existing loans that he/she wishes to obtain by the victim C.

The loan will be repaid with a loan of KRW 100 million if the existing loan is repaid.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to receive a new loan from the beginning for the same reason as the statement in 1.

Defendant 2.

arrow