logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.05.15 2017고단2231
사기
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment for eight months, respectively.

However, the two years each from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A A is a person operating a motor vehicle external restoration company of the motor vehicle type “J” in the wife population I, and Defendant B and K is a person operating a motor vehicle board or painting in the name of the “L” and “M” located in the Yeongdeungpo-si interesting Gu.

In order to deal with the cost of free hosting construction as an insurance policy, even though the vehicle is submitted with a construction guarantee that can confirm that it had been equipped with free hosting construction within a certain period prior to the accident, the Defendants and K were willing to obtain insurance money by preparing and submitting a false construction guarantee to the insurance company in order to meet the detailed and luminous cost for the motor vehicles being repaired in the maintenance plant due to traffic accidents.

1. From May 20, 2013 to September 23, 2015, Defendants and K filed insurance proceeds with the P Co-Defendant for the purport that he/she had conducted a false construction guarantee on April 24, 2014 that he/she had conducted a free hosting on the part of N’s O-ray vehicles entered into a traffic accident under J’s “J”, and that he/she had received KRW 250,00 for the payment of KRW 250,00 for the cost of conducting a new free hosting on the said vehicle along with the said construction guarantee document, and received KRW 13,50,000 in total as shown in the attached Table 1 for the total of 333 times as in the list of crimes committed.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with K and received property by deceiving victims.

2. On July 2013, Defendant A: (a) prepared a false construction guarantee to the P Co., Ltd. that he/she carried out coo-scooting on September 12, 2012, even though he/she had not carried out a coo-cooing construction of Q Q as a traffic accident from the said J “J”; and (b) newly carried on the said vehicle along with the said construction guarantee to the damaged P Co., Ltd.

arrow