logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.11.29 2017고단1624
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 2, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act at the Seoul Southern District Court on September 2, 2016 and the judgment was finalized on September 30, 2016.

1. The Defendant in Gwangju City on November 2014, 201, “The Hamnam Co., Ltd., Ltd., M&A is proceeding, and the 3,000 foot shares will rise to at least 8,000 won.

I would like to make an investment of KRW 100 million available to see the minimum of 10% of the principal.

“A false representation was made.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the injured party, he did not make an investment in the shares of the Happiness Co., Ltd. but intended to pay his personal debt, and there was no intention or ability to leave the profits from the investment in the shares.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen earlier, had the victim open the treatment securities account, and had the victim do so thereafter, was transferred KRW 250 million in total to the said account managed by the Defendant, including KRW 10 million on November 19, 2014, KRW 50 million on March 5, 2015, KRW 70 million on April 37, 2015, and KRW 270 million on May 27, 2015.

2. On March 1, 2015, the Defendant, while driving as if the said victim was a competent investor, purchased the housing at the above address of KRW 460 million, but first, upon transferring the ownership of the housing, succeeded to KRW 220 million if the ownership of the housing was transferred, and later paid KRW 240 million in the remainder.

A false statement was made.

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any special property, and as the defendant bears a debt equivalent to one billion won at the time, there was no intention or ability to pay the purchase price to the victim even if he received the transfer of ownership from the injured party.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, did not pay KRW 180 million out of the purchase price after acquiring ownership of the said house from the injured party E under the name of the victim E, and exempted the payment thereof.

arrow