The Defendant is a person who has been in an internal relationship with the victim B from March 2013 to December 2014.

On May 8, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim that “The Defendant borrowed KRW 10 million to the singing president working in the Republic of Korea, who is in need of money,” on the part of the Plaintiff at a Buddhist area of Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul-si”).

However, the defendant received money from the victim at the time to use it as his daily living expenses, and there was no intention or ability to pay the money borrowed from the victim due to the circumstance that he did not have any special income or property other than KRW 200,000 per day when he works as a singing room employee, and he did not have any obligation borrowed from another person in bad credit standing.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 87,450,000 from the victim to the new bank account (Account Number C) in the name of the Defendant, and took over KRW 10,000 from such time to September 28, 2014, a total of KRW 21 times, as shown in the annexed List of Crimes, was acquired by the defrauded.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including a cross-examination with B);

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning B;

1. A detailed statement of transactions in each passbook;

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

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] under Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, which covers the pertinent provision of the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment [the scope of punishment] There is no person who has a basic area (6 to 100 million won) [the decision of sentencing] [the defendant has shown in 6 months of imprisonment that he led to confession and reflect against the crime of this case], and the fact that there is no particular criminal record other than once of minor fine, it is favorable to the defendant, but the crime of this case is committed by taking advantage of the relation with the victim in which the defendant was in a usual relationship with the victim and by taking advantage of his poor economic situation.