logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2020.11.11 2020고단2302
사기
Text

Imprisonment with prison labor for a crime set forth in Article 1 of the judgment of the defendant, and for a crime set forth in Article 2 of the judgment, four months, respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 27, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months for fraud, etc. in the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch, and the said judgment was finalized on May 31, 2017. On September 13, 2017, the Daejeon District Court sentenced two years of a suspended sentence to four months of imprisonment for fraud, which became final and conclusive on October 20, 2018. On October 23, 2019, the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 31, 2019.

"200 Highest 2302"

1. The Defendant, against the victim B, was the actual representative of the Plaintiff-gu, Nam-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul.

On December 8, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim at the F coffee shop located in Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Incheon-gu, that “Sacheon-gu G and Htel new construction business was conducted by the LAF and the LAFD entered into a transfer or acquisition agreement with the former executor. If KRW 100 million is paid as sales agency deposit money, the Defendant would give the LAF to the LAF which operates the instant office building and return the KRW 100 million by December 31, 2017.”

However, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to return KRW 100 million until December 31, 2017, even if the Defendant received KRW 100 million from the victim due to the lack of the right to operate the said business.

As above, the defendant deceivings the victim and received KRW 100 million from the victim to the Nong Bank account in the name of No.D. on the same day.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

"200 Highest 2594"

2. Around October 15, 2010, the criminal defendant against the victim K said that, “The victim, who operates a heavy tea sales business in the M office operated by the defendant in Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul, would be able to purchase a vehicle if he/she is a vehicle. If he/she receives a construction contract within this country, he/she would pay it more than two weeks.”

However, the defendant is a construction contract at the time.

arrow