beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 12,000,000 won.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. On April 20, 2012, the Defendant: (a) at the Defendant’s office located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Incheon, the victim D and the victim E, the Defendant had been in custody of the 36 train 36 vehicles used at the time when he had been in bankruptcy while carrying out transportation business before the towing and had been in prison; and (b) may sell the vehicle. The Defendant borrowed KRW 50 million as the long-term parking fee and the cost for the exchange of the distribution of the vehicle is necessary to sell the vehicle, the Defendant would immediately repay the principal with the high interest of selling the vehicle within 2-3 months; and (c) at that time, the victim, who became aware of the introduction of Defendant D, made a statement to the same effect as E.
However, in fact, even if the defendant was not a vehicle owned by the defendant and borrowed money from the victims, he did not have any intent or ability to pay the money in accordance with the agreement.
Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, was accused of the victims and transferred KRW 50 million from the victims to G account in the name of G (National Bank H) used by the Defendant on May 31, 2012.
2. On August 15, 2012, the Defendant against the victim I stated, at the coffee shop near the Defendant’s office located in the Nam-gu Incheon Nam-gu, Incheon, that “The Defendant: (a) had well known the organized violence ploss in the Republic of Korea; (b) had been entrusted with the disposal of the ploss in possession of any person’s curios; (c) in the event that the ploss in question requires KRW 30 million on the condition that he received the curios, and (d) had not been lent KRW 20 million,00,000,000,000,000 won as at the present, it would be sold with the curios and pay a lot of interest and principal by selling it.”
However, in fact, the defendant did not have been entrusted with the disposal of curios and did not think that he would use the money received from the victim for his personal purpose, and did not have any intention or ability to repay the money to the victim.
In this respect.