logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2014.1.9.선고 2013고단2513 판결
절도,사기
Cases

2013 Highest 2513, 2013 Highest 2013 Highest 3320 (Joints) 2013 Highest 3321 (Joints) 2013 Highest 2013

Provided, That 322(Consolidation) 2013 Highest 3564 (Consolidation), 2013 Highest 3947 (Consolidation)

Larceny, Fraud

Defendant

A person shall be appointed.

Prosecutor

Mara, Gu resident flag, Kim Jong-tae, Park Park, Park Park-young, Gong Tae-gu (Public Prosecution) and Kim U.S. (Public Trial)

Defense Counsel

Attorney Quota-type (Korean Office Election)

Imposition of Judgment

January 9, 2014

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Facts of crime

"2013 Highest 2513"

【Criminal Power】

On September 16, 2011, the Defendant sentenced the Ulsan District Court to one year and six months of imprisonment for a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc.) at the Ulsan District Court, and completed the execution of the above punishment at the Yang Detention House on December 26, 2012.

[Criminal Facts]

On July 6, 2013: around 00, the Defendant pretended to pay the PC usage fee even though there was no cash or credit card, etc. at the time, and even though there was no intention or ability to pay the PC usage fee, and acquired the pecuniary profit equivalent to KRW 6,300 using PC from around that time to July 7, 2013:0.

"2013 Highest 320

On May 28, 2013: around 06:0, the Defendant, at the FPC operated by the victim D in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-do, was able to use the PC and pay the PC normally after using it. However, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the PC using it.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the above employees, was provided with compliance and Internet services from the employees, used the same day, and did not pay KRW 7,900 from that time to that day, acquired property profits equivalent to that amount by means of not paying KRW 13:00.

"2013 Highest 321

On May 23, 2013: around 19: Around 19, the Defendant entered the “00 Monitoring operated by the victim G in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, and used the PC until May 24, 2013 after being provided with the PC using the PC from the victim G, the business owner, and until May 24, 2013. However, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the PC using the PC.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, took property benefits without paying the amount of PC equivalent to KRW 11,200, while using the PC during the said hours.

2013 Highest 322

On June 4, 2013, at around 00, the Defendant: (a) used the PC to employees H, who are victims, from 00 PCs located in Ulsan-gu New-dong 4, Ulsan-gu; (b) believed that, even if there is no intent or ability to pay the amount for the use, the Defendant would be able to receive the fee; and (c) obtained the pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount by removing the amount of KRW 7,400 from the use of the PC for about 730 minutes until around 30:0.

"2013 Highest 3564

On September 14, 2013: Around 40, the Defendant had the same attitude that the Defendant would pay the cost of using the crypededly in the absence of the intent or ability to pay the fee for the cryp after the crypary due to the absence of cash or credit card, etc. at the time, from the point of time to the point of time, around 01:0 on September 14, 201, by using the cryp installed at the place of the cryp for about 10 hours at around 01:0 on the following day.

Accordingly, the Defendant had taken advantage of property benefits equivalent to the above usage price by deceiving the victim.

2013 Highest 3947,

1. Larceny;

On June 22, 2013: (a) around 30, the Defendant stolen another’s property on five occasions from around that time to August 9, 2013, as indicated in the list of crimes, including, but not limited to, the following: (b) the victim J, an employee of the aforementioned PC bank, was placed on the victim’s home-to-face-to-face market value of KRW 100,000,000; (c) one Samsung Digital Ca, the market value of which is equivalent to KRW 200,000,000; and (d) the Defendant stolen another’s property from around that time to around September 2013.

2. Fraud;

A. On June 24, 2013, the Defendant pretended to pay user fees after using the PC for about 11,00 won, even though there was no cash or credit card in his/her possession at the time and there was no intention or ability to pay the PC user fees. Since around 10 hours thereafter, the Defendant obtained pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 11,000 using the PC for about 10 hours.

B. On October 29, 2013, around 46, 2016: (a) the Defendant pretended to pay the PC usage fee to the said PC-employee M, even though there was no cash or credit card, etc. at the time, and there was no intention or ability to pay the PC usage fee due to the lack of any means of payment, such as cash or credit card in his/her possession; (b) the Defendant acquired the pecuniary profit equivalent to KRW 6,200 by using the PC for about six hours from that time.

C. On July 12, 2013: around 02: (a) around 00 at the same place as Paragraph (2) of Article 2-A; (b) the Defendant pretended to pay the PC usage fee even though there was no cash or credit card, etc. in possession at the time, and even though there was no intent or ability to pay the PC usage fee; and (c) the Defendant acquired the pecuniary profit equivalent to KRW 4,000 using PC for three hours thereafter.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of N police statement;

1. Written statements of 0, D, G, H, I, M, K, J, P, Q, Q and R

1. Receipt, details of charges;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal records and investigation reports (Attachment to judgment);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (each fraud), Article 329 (one thief) of the Criminal Act, and Selection of Imprisonment

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges

Judges Or Dong-dong

arrow