Telecommunications financial fraud (one-time Bosing) is an organized crime with various stages of stages, such as ‘total liability planning and instructing a whole crime', ‘liging and deceiving a victim,' ‘liging and delivering a cash account, cash card, account of crime, etc.', ‘liging and delivering a cash transfer from the cash payment date to the victims or directly receiving the cash transfer from the cash withdrawal date, ‘cash delivering a cash transfer to the domestic or foreign total account', ‘transfer of the deposited criminal proceeds', ‘transfer of the deposited criminal proceeds'.

At around 10:10 on May 2, 2022, 202, the volume of the volume of the volume of the loan to be paid to the victim A, “The head of the team in charge of the national Lone Star Bank loan” was called “the head of the team in charge of the national Lone Star loan. The low interest rate of the loan was extended to KRW 48 million due to Coina, but the credit level of the loan was called as “the account known to the F13 million won was repaid.”

However, the above-mentioned incentive was the intention to commit the singishing fraud, and the victim did not have the intention or ability to normally lend the loan to the victim.

On the other hand, at around 10:00 on May 25, 2020, the Defendant offered a proposal to grant a government-funded loan at an annual interest rate of 2.9% to 6.7% per annum when he withdraws from the Defendant’s name-free solicitation book, which misrepresented the employees of the national bank, at the 13 million won deposited in the agricultural cooperative account in the name of the Defendant, and the Defendant knew that the above proposal could facilitate the sing crime, and informed the Defendant of the number of the said agricultural cooperative account in the name of the Defendant.

Afterwards, the above-mentioned inducement liability for the name of the defendant was by deceiving the victim as such, and was transferred to the above No. 13 million won account in the name of the defendant around 10:13 on May 28, 2020 to the above No. 3 million won.

On the same day, the Defendant received an instruction from the above solicitation books on his name in 14:49 on the same day, withdrawn KRW 4 million out of KRW 13 million deposited by the victim to the said account at the ○○○○○ branch of Chuncheon-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gangwon-do, and 16:30 on the same day, aided and abetted the Defendant to commit the crime of fraud of the employees of the above Bosing singing singing singing singing singing singing singing singing singinging

2. Determination

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, if an employee of a bank, such as the defendant's provision of his account information and the defendant's lending of 13 million won to the victim without knowledge as to the facts charged in this case, withdraws 4 million won out of 13 million won from the victim's name and deliver it to the victim's name in his name. It is recognized that the defendant was informed at the time before and after the withdrawal of this case that the defendant was provided with the bank counter openings of the bank at his own account, and then the defendant was provided with information from the bank sources at the time when he was provided with the bank openings of the bank openings of the bank at the time when he was provided with information, and that the defendant was provided with the bank's account openings of the bank openings at the time when he was provided with the bank openings of the bank openings and received the bank openings of the bank openings at the time when he was provided with the information to receive the low interest rate and the government support funds similar to this case, and that he was given the bank's family or its branch.

However, as a subjective element of the constituent element of a crime, dolusent intention refers to a case where the possibility of occurrence of the crime is uncertain and it is acceptable. In order to have dolusent intention, there is a perception of the possibility of occurrence of the crime, as well as an internal intent to allow the risk of occurrence of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 85Do660, Jun. 25, 1985; 86Do2338, Feb. 10, 1987; 803Do7507, Feb. 27, 2004; 2003Do7507, Feb. 27, 2004). Whether the offender is aware of the possibility of occurrence of the crime is not dependent on the statement of the offender, and the psychological condition of the offender should be confirmed from the standpoint of the offender, and even if there is no doubt that the offender is true and reliable evidence of the crime, it should be found that there is 40 square evidence of the defendant.

In light of the above legal principles, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the Defendant recognized and admitted the outsourcing prior to the instant crime, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

On May 25, 2020, the Defendant received the text of the government-funded loan and consulted with his name in order to enter the transaction performance, and received the loan to the effect that it is possible to make the loan if it is delivered by depositing the loan in order to enter the transaction performance.

(B) The Defendant released only a part of the money that the victim remitted, and the remainder collected from his own separate account to deliver the money to the person in default of name. If the Defendant accepted the possibility of scaming even though he was aware of the possibility of scaming, it would be very exceptional and different that he accepted only KRW 9 million as he did not obtain the loan he intended, and thus, there is no other payment for the instant act. Thus, it is difficult for the Defendant to find reasons to allow the possibility of scaming.

Absently, the contents of the instructions given by a person who was unable to obtain a name, in an abnormal manner of loan, and the defendant could recognize the possibility of scaming in the process of withdrawing the counter of the bank before and after the instant case. However, the fact that the defendant could not well look at the issue of attention given by the bank is shaking. Furthermore, the victim of the instant case was urged by the defendant to repay the existing loan by means of raising a balance in order to obtain a low interest rate loan similar to the defendant, thereby making a financial remittance to the defendant's account. It cannot be ruled out the possibility that the defendant, who did not have experienced a second financial right loan experience, was understood as the process of obtaining a loan without ascertaining that the instructions given by the person who was not the victim for scam

Therefore, the facts charged of this case are not proven, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the decision of not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.