On January 15, 2015, the Defendant, by telephone, worked for the victim B by telephone, “a car in the luminous city, was in the office of streetlight, and was in the office of contract for about two years after retirement. By this year, for a person who has served in the automobile for at least ten years, the welfare program that provides the 1-2 large scale of the vehicle to the person who has served in the automobile for at least ten years in the contract position by contract, is in secret, and the vehicle is being supplied to the victim B at least 40% of the normal price. The target is, and the down payment is, the vehicle is released after approximately 40% at the price of about 40% for each type of vehicle.

On the date of release, contact is made from the person in charge, 10% is discounted if the remaining vehicle price is paid in cash, and 3% interest at the time of proceeding in installment is possible to purchase in installments for 60 months.

“A false statement” was made.

However, at the time, the Defendant had already left the vehicle and had not been entitled to use the said discount event, and even if he received the down payment from the injured party, he did not have the intent or ability to deliver the vehicle to the victim.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceiving the victim as above and receiving KRW 3 million from the national bank account in the name of the defendant under the name of the victim as the down payment for the vehicle from the victim, as well as receiving KRW 3 million on January 21, 2015 from the time of such deception.

6. From 17. up to 17. A total sum of KRW 57,00,000 was obtained through the delivery of 25 times, such as the list of crimes in the annexed sheet.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N,O, and P respective statements;

1. Application of the current status of policyholders of the welfare program for the elderly and the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the specifications of transactions;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes are high, and there are many damages.

The recovery of damage is almost possible.