On September 2015, the defendant around 2015, the defendant raised a large amount of money to the victim D in the passenger car investment of the defendant D in the following city:

I also attempt to be in its business.

The loan made a false statement, stating that the principal shall be repaid within three months and the interest shall be calculated at 2.5% per 10,000 won per 10,000 won.”

However, in fact, even if the injured party was able to receive money from the injured party and did not have the intent or ability to repay the amount of damage, the injured party was granted KRW 50 million in cash in front of the F Real Estate E in North Korea on November 25, 2015.

In this way, the defendant deceivings the victim, thereby deceiving 50 million won.

Summary of Evidence

Witness

D’s testimony investigation report (related to the verification of account transactions, such as a new bank and a national bank, etc.) (related to the request for submission of the details of account transactions, investigation report (related to the request for submission of suspect A’s counterpart account transaction), investigation report (related to attaching the details of account transactions, etc.), investigation report (related to the attachment of the statement of account deposit, etc. on November 25, 2015 of the suspect’s post office account), investigation report [related to the suspicion of intentional termination of the suspect’s post office account], investigation report [related to the suspicion of intentional termination of the suspect’s post office account], inquiry of transaction details, Kakao Stockholm printed out, individual entry into and departure from the Republic of Korea, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the Act on the Status of Individual Immigration, and Article 347(1) of the same Act applicable to the sentencing of imprisonment with prison labor, led the Defendant to not intentionally induce the victim to make a face-to-face and did not borrow money to the victim.

Since the victim had been engaged in money transactions with the defendant with respect to gambling in which the victim demanded repayment by the victim, the victim was also aware that there is a false situation, and the deception of deception is peeped.

(b) other.