On January 9, 2017, the Defendant concluded that “A victim C, the interest rate of the Dong fee of the same hospital, which was B, who was the interest rate of the Dong fee of the same hospital, was false to the effect that “A business that is operating the car fee in Japan, and therefore, it is necessary to pay money, and it is necessary to lend KRW 1,00,000 to him/her.”

However, the defendant did not operate a car page, and there was no intention or ability to pay the victim properly.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 1,00,000 from the post office account under the name of the Defendant for the same day from the victim, from the victim, and received from that time all KRW 9,832,316, supra, by March 16, 2018, as shown in the list of crimes in the annexed sheet of crimes, from that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Relevant legal provisions on criminal facts, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act on the selection of punishment, and the defendant's reason for sentencing of punishment is against the defendant.

At present, the victim agreed to pay the amount of damage, which is extremely limited, has been paid later, and has promised to pay the amount later.

However, in light of the form of deception in this case, the attitude of the defendant's repayment, the circumstances leading up to the agreement of the victim, etc., there is a probable probability that the damage amount will be neglected if the case becomes final and conclusive due to suspended execution, etc.

Considering that the amount not paid until now exceeds KRW 90,000,000 and the circumstances of deception are very poor, it is inevitable to punish the accused.

However, it is not legally binding to provide the defendant with the last opportunity to recover damage.