(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.09.11 2015노2159 | 리걸엔진

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) 인천지방법원 2015.09.11 2015노2159

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal only borrowed money from D, there was no fact of deceiving the victim, and there was sufficient means to repay the money to the defendant.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the instant facts charged and the Defendant and the Victim C were the guidances operated by D around 2008.

Around November 1, 2008, the Defendant: (a) at D’s house located in Gangseo-gu Seoul E Apartment 201, Dong 806, Gangseo-gu, Seoul, the Defendant: (b) “The head of the Nongng Bank located in the Republic of Korea; (c) the head of the Kimpo-si waiting for the examination of the loan; and (d) the Defendant may decrease the approval of the loan even if within the Republic of Korea; (c) however, the Defendant is required to pay the loan; (d) he intends to borrow the loan until the loan is actually made; (e) he borrowed the loan to B by lending the interest amount of KRW 90 million with the money; (d) he uses the interest play with the money; (e) he will repay the amount of KRW 100 million with the loan amount of KRW 100 million; and (e) upon obtaining the approval of the loan, he believed the loan from this frame to the extent that the loan would be repaid; and (e) he believed that the loan has not been repaid the money through the mold and loan.”

However, in fact, the Kimpo-si did not intend to obtain the above loans, and the defendant, while taking excessive debts at the time, tried to use the funds borrowed from the victim to pay personal debts, and even if borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to pay the funds 15 days later.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim and then deceiving the victim through D on November 14, 2008, acquired 90 million won from the victim to the single bank account under the name of the Defendant through D in order to borrow money.

B. The lower court determined that the facts charged of this case are as follows: (a) the witness C, F, and D’s legal statement, and G’s statement.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2015.06.03 2014고단6736

-울산지방법원 2013.07.26 2013고단334

-서울남부지방법원 2019.05.15 2018고단1799

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2019.07.17 2019고단1211

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2013.12.24 2013고단473