When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On November 13, 2012, the Defendant concluded that “The Defendant would pay the purchase price of cosmetics to the victim, if he/she lends money, and pay the purchase price of cosmetics to the victim at the victim C’s residence located at the window B of Changwon-si, Changwon-si.”

However, in fact, the Defendant had been unable to normally perform the duties of selling cosmetics since April 2012, because it was impossible for the Defendant to pay the price of cosmetics. The Defendant was obligated to pay five million won or more, and there was no particular import. Therefore, even if the Defendant borrowed the money from the victim, it did not have the intent and ability to pay

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received three million won from the victim’s residence around November 14, 2012 from the victim, and received two million won as a policeman in December 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Application of the police protocol law to C

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Selection of selective fines (not less than the amount of damage, including the fact that an agreement has been reached with the victim);

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;