وبالتحقيق الابتدائي من قبل الادعاء

وبالتحقيق الابتدائي من قبل الادعاء العام مع المتهم انكر التهمة المنسوبة اليه وبين وجود عقد شراكة بينه وبين المدعيان ، وانهما كانا يعلمان بأنه لا علاقة له بالاسم التجاري للمحل ، وان المحل المستأجر كان باسم الشركة صاحبة الموقع وانه كان يتم دفع ايجار اعلى من الايجار الحقيقي ليكون الفارق لمالك الشركة ، وان المدعيان هما من قاما باحضار عقد الشراكة فقام بالتوقيع عليه ، واستمر العمل في المحل الا ان مشروعهم لم ينجح وتعرض للخسارة فطلب مهما ادارة المحل فرفضا ، وطالباه بمبلغ الشركة فأوضح ان ذلك مخالف لمبدأ الشراكة في الربح والخسارة ، فأحاله الادعاء العام للمحاكمة بجنحة الاحتيال المؤثمة بالمادة (288) من قانون الجزاء .

النتائج (الإنجليزية) 2:

And to investigate the primary by the public prosecutor with the accused denied the charges against him, and the existence of a partnership contract between him and the plaintiffs, and they they knew that he has nothing to do with the brand name of the shop, and that the tenant shop was on behalf of the company owning the site and that he was to be paid a higher rent from real rent to be the difference the owner of the company, and that the plaintiffs are from they bring the partnership contract so he signed it, and continued to work in the shop, but their project did not succeed and he was losing asked whatever shop administration they refused, and Talibah amount the company explained that it is contrary to the principle of partnership in the profit and loss, referred him public prosecutor for the trial of a misdemeanor fraud Almatmh to Article 288 of the Penal Code.

النتائج (الإنجليزية) 3:

Primary investigation of the prosecution and the accused denied the charges against him and a partnership agreement with the applicants, they were both were aware that it has nothing to do with the name commercial shop, shop, tenant, though was on behalf of the company website and he had been paying rent higher than the real rent as the difference of the owner of the company, and the applicants are they brought a partnership contract he signed, and work in the shop, but their plan failed and Whatever department store suffered the loss and Frfda Wtalbah $company explained that it was contrary to the principle of partnership and profit and loss in the trial, the prosecution Fahalh designate a crime of fraud article 288 of the penal code.