logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.11.30 2014고단2311
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 10, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment of one year and eight months in Seoul Southern District Court for fraud, etc. on March 5, 2013, and completed the execution of the sentence in Seoul Southern Prison on March 5, 2013.

On August 2013, the Defendant agreed to entrust the sale of new buildings to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) to 1 billion won on the condition that it invests in D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”), but it did not invest one billion won in D, which was invalidated on November 201, 2013. As the said agreement became null and void, the Defendant had an investment contract between the Defendant and D, intending to acquire money from the victim F as a sub-entrustment of the right to sell in lots.

1. Around December 26, 2013, the Defendant forged private documents at H office operated by the Defendant located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, using a computer, entered “documents number: 20103.1207; Item A4 on the paper of A4, using a computer, sent a written response to the fact that the Defendant sent cooperation with the content related to the parcelling-out at the early city E at the early city; H sent a written response to the sales price sold at the early city at the early city at the early city; (a) referring to the terms and conditions of the sales team and the terms and conditions of the sales team as requested by the Defendant; and (b) Recognizing that the existing rental team belongs to the “I” rather than the “D”; and (c) printed out the name “J” and marked the official seal of the Plaintiff, which had been previously attached to the name of the company.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a copy of the reply in the name of the I Co., Ltd., a private document on rights and obligations.

2. Around December 26, 2013, the Defendant, at the above H office, exercised a false answer as if it were a document duly formed with the signing of a false answer.

3. The Defendant’s fraud is above H. around December 26, 2013.

arrow