(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.03.21 2012고단2638

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) 서울동부지방법원 2013.03.21 2012고단2638

사기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven months.

Reasons

Criminal facts

1. Around October 2007, the Defendant against D made a false statement to the victim D that “If the promotion fund is insufficient to operate the apartment project in the H-il site, such as Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G (hereinafter “instant apartment site”), the Defendant would recover the principal after three months, recover the principal from the five-month interest of each month, and pay 10% of the profit.”

However, in fact, the Defendant failed to secure the land ownership of the instant apartment site and to prepare a plan for financing investment in the said implementation project. Therefore, even if receiving money from the victim, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to return the money as agreed upon.

Nevertheless, on October 18, 2007, the Defendant received from the victim the total amount of KRW 100 million, including KRW 20 million as the passbook in the name of (i) the corporate passbook in the name of (ii) the Defendant operated on or around October 18, 2007, and KRW 100 million as the passbook in the name of (ii) the International Department of Justice around October 22 of the same year, and KRW 20 million as the passbook in the name of the said J around October 30 of the same year.

2. On October 2007, the criminal defendant against K had F make a false statement to the victim K that "the money already entered in order to get a son to get an apartment in H is more than KRW 2 billion. The amount that is the same as the money will be completed when it is more than KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000 won of the principal and interest will be paid."

However, the defendant could not normally promote the above apartment execution project on the grounds as stated in Paragraph 1, and even if he received money from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to return the money as agreed.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received KRW 40 million from the victim on October 30, 2007, and around October 31 of the same year.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2014.12.24 2014고단1127

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.06.21 2015고단4045

-대전지방법원 2014.11.14 2014고단2486

-수원지방법원 2013.08.28 2012고단4810

-인천지방법원 2012.10.10 2012고합515