(영문) 전주지방법원 2012.12.27 2012고합13

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) 전주지방법원 2012.12.27 2012고합13

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the person who uses the position of the president of the above company as the actual manager of (State)E located in Kim Jong-siD.

On January 23, 2010, the Defendant supplied the goods to the complainants on June 2010, 2010 after the increase in the demand for PED supply in preparation for the local election files. The Defendant paid the price of the goods to the complainants.

"A contract to import 100 electric display sets on the same day" was concluded, and around March 2, 2010, a contract to import 360 electric display sets additionally was entered into.

However, the Defendant was in arrears with wages and retirement allowances exceeding KRW 150 million, and even if the amount of debt exceeds the total amount of KRW 6.25 million, even if the amount of debt exceeds the amount of debt equivalent to KRW 540 million, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the amount of goods to the complainant, as it did not secure any transaction partner who can sell or lease the imported LE electronic displays, and thus did not have any intent or ability to pay the amount of goods to the complainant.

From April 13, 2010 to May 26, 2010, the Defendant, by deceiving the complainant as above, received 302 bit electronic displays equivalent to the sum of USD 1,175,891 (1,328,756,830, and KRW 1,130 per$1,000 from around April 13, 201 to around May 26, 201, 10, 200, 228 feet, 120 feet, 24 feet, and 130 feet.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion that the defendant and his defense counsel concluded a contract with the complainant to import LED electronic displays from the police investigation stage to this court and failed to fully pay the goods price after obtaining LED electronic displays from the complainant. However, since the defendant sufficient intent or ability to pay the goods price at the time of the contract of this case, they asserted that the defendant has no intention to commit fraud.

3. Whether the crime of fraud was established by the defraudation of the judgment property was delivered the property.

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 (전주) 2013.04.02 2013노18

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.10.25 2012고단6274

-서울고등법원 2015.05.21 2014나2030559

-서울북부지방법원 2014.06.25 2013가합21653

-창원지방법원 2018.11.08 2017나6058