logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.23 2017고합828
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

【Resumed Facts C】 The representative director of a foreign corporation D, which is a management consulting company and overseas investment advisory company, and the defendant is the representative director of D, a domestic corporation.

C entered into a contract with the victim F and KOSDAQ-listed companies to acquire at least KRW 13.8 billion.

【Criminal facts, along with C, the Defendant: (a) although the Government did not promote the business of acquiring an unsold apartment unit of 100 households, the Defendant would sell the two households of H’ apartment units in a manner less than the market price by the damaged party.

At that time, the down payment for the above apartment was issued, and the defendant and C conspired to consume it for the purpose of the separate business fund.

C on March 16, 2010, at the victim's office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government I, the victim has 100 households of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government H unsold apartment owned by the Government.

The audit indication about the reduction of the acquisition price in the case of the acquisition of the L in the case of the L-based apartment unsold in lots, stating that “H” apartment units shall be sold at a low price of 85% at the market price, and 30% of the total purchase price shall be changed as down payment.”

On March 26, 2010, in accordance with the above public offering, the Defendant continuously demanded the victim to have the right to the 100 unsold apartment units owned by the Government of the Jung-gu Seoul Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City J Building to prepare a sales agreement agreement with the two households of the H “H” apartment units and deposit the down payment with the corporate account in the name of the E-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Co., Ltd. by the due date.

However, in fact, the LAE did not carry out the business of acquiring 100 households of unsold apartment units in lots by the government, and the defendant, who is the accomplice, has promoted a business of acquiring unsold apartment units in H' separately, or has the right to the above apartment units in fact, apartment units as agreed upon by the victim.

arrow