logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.09.03 2014고정3259
국민기초생활보장법위반
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. On January 9, 2006, the Defendant, a beneficiary under the National Basic Living Security Act, was awarded a successful bid under the name of 101st floor of the 1st floor of the Geum-gu, Busan, and held a title trust to D around that time, the Defendant received the housing and livelihood benefits of KRW 12,291,000 in total 36 times from May 2009 to April 20, 201 by an unlawful means without reporting that he/she acquired the ownership of the said commercial building to D.

B. The Defendant, a beneficiary under the National Basic Living Security Act, provided D with KRW 69,232,00 on Jan. 9, 2006. On the same day, he was awarded a successful bid under the name of 101st floor of the 1st floor of the 1st floor of the 1st floor of the 2006-gu Busan, and trusted the above commercial building to D. The above 69,232,000, which was paid a successful bid price to D, did not report the fact that occurred around that time to the competent security agency, and received residence and livelihood benefits as described in the primary facts charged.

2. Article 49 of the former National Basic Living Security Act (amended by Act No. 7738 of Dec. 23, 2005; hereinafter the same) applicable to the crime stated in each of the above facts charged provides that the above provision shall be punished when receiving benefits by deception or other unlawful means.

However, according to the records, even if the above commercial buildings or the defendant, as stated in each of the above facts charged, included KRW 69,232,00 as the successful bid price in D's property, the defendant still constitutes a beneficiary under the National Basic Living Security Act, and thus, he/she has received a continuous payment of residence and livelihood benefits. Thus, there was a significant increase in the defendant's property as stated in the facts charged, but in the case of the primary facts charged, according to the records, the facts that the defendant trusted the above commercial buildings to D and the other party has a title trust agreement.

arrow