logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 원주지원 2018.06.22 2017고정303
사기등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding six million won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant, 2017, 303, was introduced by the branch, who is in need of apartment mortgage loan, and had the complainant receive a security loan of 20 million won.

1. On April 2, 2014, at a place where it is unknown, the Defendant made the said complainant a false statement that “it is possible to allow the said complainant to additionally get an apartment mortgage loan,” and if so, 2.1 million won of the loan fee is required.

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to receive additional loans even after receiving the loan fee from the complainant.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the complainant, received KRW 2.1 million from the complainant’s account in the name of C around April 10, 2014, around 16:30,000 from the complainant.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the complainant, received property of 2.1 million won.

2. On April 2, 2014, the Defendant intended to sell real estate at a place where it is unknown and repay the loan to the said complainant, who intends to sell real estate, will be treated with the need to pay an amount of KRW 1.2 million in the name of taxes on the sale of real estate and KRW 1.60,000 in the cost of processing real estate documents.

‘False speech' was made.

However, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to process the sale of real estate even after receiving taxes, etc. on real estate from the complainant.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the complainant, was deposited 160,000 won in the name of D on April 30, 2014, and 1.2 million won in the name of E on May 14, 2014.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the complainant, received property of 1,360,000 won.

[2017 High 304]

1. On January 14, 2014, the Defendant forged a private document: (a) entered “G” mobile phone sales stores located in “G” in “G”; (b) the Defendant entered the application form for mobile phone entrance into “H” in the column for purchase and the applicant column, respectively; and (c) signed H’s signature on the side.

Accordingly, the defendant is a mobile phone with the name of H, which is a private document related to rights and obligations for the purpose of uttering.

arrow