If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

On November 8, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C, stating that “A person is unable to make a mobile phone in his/her name because of bad credit standing, and there is no intention or ability to pay a mobile phone cost and a fee,” regardless of the fact that there is no certain import or property, the Defendant would make a mobile phone in his/her name. Therefore, the Defendant would make a mobile phone in his/her name and make a mobile phone in his/her name so that he/she may not make a mobile phone in his/her name and make a mobile phone in his/her name.”

The Defendant had the victim apply for the purchase of a mobile phone in the name of the victim on the same day, and received a non-market mobile phone from the victim. Since that time, the Defendant used the mobile phone from around that time and did not pay the mobile phone fee of KRW 262,910, and acquired the same profit.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, received property and acquired property benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of each police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Application of the police protocol law to C

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;