logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.09.08 2017고단3454
사기
Text

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[2] The Defendant obtained a total of KRW 50 million from M through a false statement to M (hereinafter referred to as “M”) from M (hereinafter referred to as “M”) on two occasions as follows: (a) the Defendant obtained a total of KRW 50 million from M and acquired it by deception.

[Attachment]

1. On Aug. 10, 2009, the Defendant shall receive the time limit payment three months after lending KRW 20 million to the victim M in a “O” restaurant (Defendant operation) located N at the time of L on August 10, 2009.

Although “The Defendant had no particular property at the time, the Defendant was liable to pay KRW 200 million to KRW 300 million, and the above restaurant was operated as a hostile, as well as the Plaintiff had no intent or ability to pay the borrowed money normally, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim M due to an economic difficult relationship, such as the receipt of the time limit for a successful bidder and the failure to pay the said money, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was transferred 20 million won to the deposit account in the name of P, a parent, of the same day.

2. On September 21, 2009, the Defendant shall receive the time limit money from the victim M at the same place as on September 21, 2009, with a loan of KRW 30 million due to the balance of real estate purchase.

Although the Defendant talked to the effect that “, as described in the preceding paragraph, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the debt normally even if he/she borrowed money from the victim M due to a difficult economic situation, such as that stated in the preceding paragraph.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received 30 million won from the victim M to the above deposit account on the same day.

[2] The Defendant, at the end of February, 2011, paid a normal payment to Q Q from “O” (hereinafter “O”) to the victim Q, even after having subscribed to the winning bid system in which the party is a leading state, and received a normal payment.

The purport of “..........”

arrow