(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.03.17 2016고단1599

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) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.03.17 2016고단1599

사기

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On September 8, 2011, the Defendant charged with the instant charges: (a) at the D Authorized Broker Office located in G in Geosung City around Sep. 8, 201; (b) the victim E has the right to sell apartment buildings to be purchased rapidly in Liwon Young City; and (c) the victim E has the right to sell apartment buildings to be purchased rapidly in Liwon Young City due to the lack of money for the party head, and (d) the interest shall be repaid together with the interest.

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the injured party, he was able to pay the defendant's debts to other debtors and card payments, and there was no ability or intention to pay the victim's money.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 40 million won from the victim to the national bank account (F) in the name of the Defendant on the same day from the victim and acquired it by remittance.

2. Determination

A. The defendant and his defense counsel consistently received money from the investigative agency to the court from the victim under the pretext of investment in the light rental apartment, and actually purchased the right to sell the leased apartment with the money received from the injured party and held it up to now, and there is sufficient financial capability of the defendant at the time. Thus, the defendant did not have the intention to deceive or defraud the victim.

The argument is asserted.

B. 1) As evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, the victim E (former G) and H’s investigative agencies and legal statements were made, and the remainder of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor is merely supporting this, and thus, we first examine the credibility of the victim and H’s statement.

In light of the following circumstances revealed through the records of this case, it is difficult to believe that the statements of the victim and H concerning the name of KRW 40 million, the substance of the resale business operated by the defendant, the intent and capacity of repayment by the defendant, etc.

A) The statements made by the victim and H on the pretext of the instant KRW 40 million.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.10.12 2017고단1509

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.22 2017노4749

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2021.02.17 2020고단1219

-서울남부지방법원 2021.02.09 2019고단5545

-대전지방법원 2017.07.14 2016고단1282