(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.10.30 2015고단1562

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) 울산지방법원 2015.10.30 2015고단1562

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 2013, 2013, the Defendant: (a) the Defendant, on the scambling ground of Busan Metropolitan City on September 2013, 2013, caused the victim C to transfer the instant truck to the Defendant at the 25 tons E25 tons of the market price, which is equivalent to KRW 60,000,000, which was possessed by the victim by entering the scambing transport in the name of his/her father; and (b) the Defendant transferred the said truck to the Defendant, he/she would have the Defendant pay the amount equivalent to KRW 36,00,000 of the truck installment debt in the name

However, the fact was that the creditors were demanded to repay their debts because of the failure to repay other debts equivalent to KRW 100 million, and the defendant was willing to dispose of the above truck at will and pay other debts of the defendant. Even if the above truck was acquired from the victim, it was operated, and there was no intention or ability to pay the amount of installments for the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received the above truck from the victim’s seat.

2. On February 26, 2014, around February 26, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement that he/she would return money within two months if he/she lent money as security to the victim C, who was residing in the victim C under the preceding paragraph, at the influent area of the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the “Sandong-dong”) and that he/she would return money within two months if he/she borrowed money as security.

However, in fact, there was a failure to repay other debts equivalent to KRW 100 million, and there was no particular property other than the above lease deposit, and there was no notification from the victim after borrowing money from the victim, and there was no intention or ability to repay other debts even if the victim borrowed money from the victim.

As above, the defendant deceivings the victim and is in the position of the victim.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 원주지원 2018.06.20 2018고단290

-광주지방법원 해남지원 2020.02.20 2019고단365

-수원지방법원 2020.11.27 2020고단2415

-인천지방법원 2019.06.12 2019고단1429

-울산지방법원 2015.07.09 2014고단4042