(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2012.12.05 2012노3135

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2012.12.05 2012노3135

사기

Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by one year and four months of imprisonment.

except that this judgment.

Reasons

1. misunderstanding of the gist of the grounds for appeal (as to the fraud of the victim L, the defendant consumeds more than the investment money received from the victim to C pursuant to the entrusted operation agreement with the victim, but failed to properly pay the proceeds agreed to by the victim due to unexpected business depression. Thus, it cannot be deemed that there was a criminal intent to deceive the victim at the time of receiving the investment from the victim, and the judgment of this court is unfair on February 2, 190.

A. On February 19, 2009, the Defendant stated that “Around February 19, 2009, at the H office located in the third floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government GG Building, the Defendant will pay the victim L 14% of the excess amount of KRW 15 million in excess of the monthly sales revenue and KRW 50 million in excess of the monthly sales revenue and KRW 14% in excess of the monthly sales revenue and KRW 50 million in the M market located in the old subway station.”

However, at the time, the above M does not seem to have opened so far, it is uncertain as to whether it is activated whether it is activated to revitalize commercial buildings. The C coffee store operated by the Defendant was the early stage of several stores, and its profitability was extremely inappropriate in the state where there was a civil dispute between the owner of most member stores and the Defendant. The Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the victim the proceeds agreed upon even if he received the operation expenses of entrusted business from the victim even if he was in a very difficult relationship with other member stores due to the aforementioned economic difficulties, such as where he was in trial due to the previous fraud and the dispute, even with other member stores.

As above, the Defendant deceivings the victim, and thereby, 30 million won as down payment in the same place on the same day from the victim.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2012.11.30 2012고단2105

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.10 2016고단4344

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2013.03.14 2012고단1568

-대전지방법원 2012.12.13 2012고단2064

-청주지방법원 2013.05.10 2012고단1224