logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.04.05 2014고단1266
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On February 18, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor due to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 28, 2011.

[2] The Defendant and the victim C agreed to jointly operate the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, by investing KRW 200 million around August 2008.

Since then, on November 19, 2009, the victim filed a claim amounting to KRW 135 million against E, and completed the registration of provisional seizure (hereinafter “provisional seizure of this case”) against three parcels of land in which the creditor is the one who suffered damage from the creditor, (D, G, H), and the building 2 Dong (hereinafter “real estate of this case”) in the land where the creditor is the one who suffered damage from the creditor.

The Defendant, at the E office on January 8, 2010, sold rice treatment plants to the victim and intended to recover investment funds, and the real estate of this case is provisionally seized in F’s name.

On the face of cancellation of provisional seizure registration, the indictment for selling rice processing plants or lending real estate as security is written only in the form of a "sale". However, according to the evidence of inspection, the victim's claim is satisfied according to the evidence of inspection.

Since the fact was recognized, it is modified and recognized as above.

It will be possible to collect bonds preferentially.

“.......”

However, in order to recover the Defendant’s claim when the injured party withdraws a provisional attachment, the Defendant stated in the indictment that “the Defendant is on the ground of false claim.” In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant is a true or false claim, and rather, he/she sought the cancellation of the instant right to collateral security against I by his/her successor.

arrow