logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.07.18 2017고단1824
사기
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and nine months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 20, 2007, the Defendant of the crime against the victim C and the victim D purchased 800 square meters in total, including E, F, F, G, H, I, etc. from the J as land owners in Yangju-si in Gyeonggi-do, which is scheduled to be expropriated by the Korea Housing Corporation around May 20, 207. However, the ownership registration and the right to move into the housing site still remains reserved to J. However, the Defendant is liable for land compensation; the Defendant, the purchaser, granted a loan of KRW 1,80,000,000 to the Korea Food Savings Bank Co., Ltd. for the above land, with the maximum amount of KRW 1,20,000,000, out of which the Defendant paid KRW 1,100,000,000 from the money to the J, prohibited the resale of the right to the land until the payment of compensation for the Korea Housing Corporation was made; and the sales contract is terminated automatically even if the above bank’s loan interest rate of KRW 8,000,0.

On July 25, 2008, the Defendant agreed to the victim C and the victim D with the purchase price of KRW 220,000,000 for the E farmland 104 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) at Yangju-si, Yangju-si, Yangju-si, and agreed to the contract deposit amount of KRW 100,00,000 on the date of the contract, and the same year.

9.1. To provide an intermediate payment of KRW 20,000,000 and at the same time to obtain an outstanding balance of KRW 100,000,000 and at the same time to register ownership transfer.

“.....”

However, as seen above, the Defendant was prohibited from resale by an agreement with the J as the owner of the land, and the Defendant was at the risk of cancelling a sales contract with J because the interest on bank loans was not sufficient to pay a large amount of loan without any particular asset. Since “the instant land” was designed to double sell and purchase the land to other persons than the victims, there was no intention or ability to transfer the ownership of the instant land to the victims.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victims as above.

arrow