logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.06.29 2017고단2212
절도등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months and by a fine of KRW 1,000,00.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

"2017 Highest 2212"

1. On May 15, 2017, the Defendant was provided cash services of KRW 6,80,000,000 in total nine times in total, from that time, using a credit card stolen from O until June 4, 2017, from an automated entry and exit machine managed by an automated entry and exit machine managed by the Plaintiff, the age limit in the bank for the settlement of the victim-based Lin-gu M&D in the front city M&D in the front city, the Defendant received 700,000 won by using a credit card, which was stolen from O, from around June 4, 2017, by using a credit card that was stolen from O during the period set forth in attached Table (1).

Accordingly, the defendant stolens cash against the victim's will, and received cash services using stolen credit cards.

2. The Defendant, on July 17, 2017, 300 pop-up 4 pop-up in the National Carpet in the Republic of Korea.

If a letter is posted and money is remitted to the victim Q Q who reported and contacted, it is false to send the goods.

However, even if the defendant received money from the beginning, he did not have the intention or ability to deliver goods.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received 280,000 won from the victim to the post office account (R) in the name of O on the same day from the victim, and acquired it by fraud, and then received 2,495,000 won in total from the victims over 15 times in total from October 25, 2017, as shown in the crime list (2) as shown in the previous crime list (2) from October 25, 2017.

"2017 Highest 2236"

1. On October 10, 2017, the Defendant posted a false statement on the Internet NAVV online page, stating that “The 64 mobile phone set is sold on a mobile phone,” and the Defendant sent money to the victim S who contacted with the Internet.

However, even if the defendant received money from the beginning, he did not have the intention or ability to send the goods.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and is the same as the victim.

arrow