logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.12.23 2015고단3835
사기등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for six months, for each of the defendants B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A was sentenced to three months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the District Court on November 19, 2014, and was detained for the period corresponding to the above sentence by the 22th day of the same month.

After that, the above judgment became final and conclusive on the 27th of the same month.

Accordingly, the number of days of detention before the judgment becomes final and conclusive is included in the original sentence, and the defendant A completed the execution of the above sentence.

1. The Defendants in fraud, along with D, etc., a forged document, recruited persons who are unable to obtain a loan by a savings bank or a lending company with low personal credit rating or because there is no other asset so that they can obtain a loan by forging various documents necessary for the loan, and recruited some of them as “a fee,” and recruited them as “a fee.”

Accordingly, the following roles are to: ① recruit loan applicants and introduce them to the Defendants; ② display an advertisement on the Internet to the effect that “afford a loan by forging documents”; ③ the Defendants have overall control over the loan process, including “Afford a loan applicant’s forging documents related to the loan and instructed the loan applicant’s answer in the process of making a confirmation call; ④ in contact with the Defendants, D is to have forged the loan-related documents, such as the certificate of employment or the statement of deposit collection statement, as if the loan applicant works in the company, and receive a confirmation phone as if the loan applicant works in the company.”

According to the above public offering, the name-based solicitation book was recruited and introduced to the Defendants, the loan applicant, and the Defendants asked D to forge the certificate of employment, etc., and D, unlike the fact, was working for the “F” company and received monthly wages, is a F-based employment certificate.

arrow