(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.09.04 2014노1540 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.09.04 2014노1540

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant, on July 13, 2012, decided to sell “O” to the victim C, and on the other hand, agreed to additionally receive the remainder of the sales price from the said victim if the said victim received KRW 6 million as the down payment from the said victim and received the said victim’s KRW 6 million as the down payment.

Since then, the above victim stated that he would not purchase the O, and the defendant and the above victim sold theO to a third party to return the down payment of KRW 6 million. The above victim issued a ship's certificate, fishery permit certificate, and the defendant's seal impression certificate to the above victim, and sold L in case where the defendant is unable to pay the above money.

Since L market price was 35 million won at the time, even if the sum of the maximum debt amount of the right to collateral security set forth in L is deducted, it is thought that the collateral value for the down payment to be refunded to the above victim is sufficient.

However, since the O does not sell the down payment to a third party, the defendant did not refund the down payment to the above victim inevitably, and the defendant did not intend to acquire the down payment from the victim from the beginning to the above victim.

B. On September 6, 2012, among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant paid KRW 1,00,000 to the victim G with the intent to purchase H with respect to the fraud of the vessel H’s “H” and fishery permit certificate. At the time of H purchase, the actual form of H was not confirmed. After checking the actual form of H from female water, as a result of checking the actual form of H from female water, H’s major structure was entirely different from the horses of the said victim, and requested the said victim to cancel the sales contract of H and to return the down payment.

Accordingly, the above victim repaid his obligation for the sale of H and released the provisional seizure, and this fact is different.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2013.01.29 2012고단837

-수원지방법원 여주지원 2013.12.16 2013고정380

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.02.25 2013고정1267

-대구지방법원 2019.10.02 2018고정1155

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2012.09.06 2011고정598