logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.02.20 2012고정1588
사기
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. From September 30, 2008, the Defendant: (a) from September 30, 2008 to September 30, 2008, the Defendant provided a brokerage service for vehicle security loans to a person who operates a lending company H in accordance with Article 103 of the G Building Act.

On May 6, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant, at the above lending business office, did not receive a vehicle from a person who wants to borrow a bond as a security,” but, on the other hand, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant would have a good QM5 2008 ceremony at KRW 5 million” to the victim I.

As above, the Defendant, as if he had been provided with a motor vehicle as collateral, was accused of the victim and received 4,750,000 won from the victim’s child to the post office account under the J’s name, and received from September 19, 201 the sum of 33,50,000 won in the same place from September 19, 201, as shown in the crime list.

[2013 Highest 690] The Defendant had a broker for vehicle security loans under the trade name of “H” from 103 of the G building at Silung-si.

On January 2, 2009, the Defendant called the victim K at the above “H” office, and told the victim K to the effect that “The Defendant would repay KRW 10 million,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, which is calculated by deducting 5% of the front interest, from the front interest, to another person as security.”

However, the Defendant did not receive a vehicle from another person as a security, and even if he borrowed money from the said victim, the Defendant did not have the ability to pay the money properly.

The Defendant received KRW 9.5 million from January 2, 2009 to March 3, 2009, in total, KRW 339,150,000 from around 55 times, as indicated in the list of crimes in attached Table, as well as from around January 2, 2009 to the post office account in the name of the said victim.

Accordingly, the defendant was given money by deceiving the above victim.

2. Determination.

arrow