On September 2012, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant is well aware of the executive members, etc. of the On-the-spot Motor Vehicle Labor Union Co., Ltd.” to the victim D, “The Defendant would work for the on-the-spot Motor Vehicle Labor Union Co., Ltd.” at the front room of the Defendant in the Seocho-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

However, at the time, the defendant was not aware of the person who could be involved in the recruitment of employees of modern automobiles, and was in a position to pay personal debts such as corporate bonds, etc., and was thought to be used in repaying his/her debt immediately after the receipt of the said money, and did not have any intent or ability to have the victim employed his/her act in modern automobiles.

On September 10, 2012, the Defendant received KRW 30 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (F) under the name of the Defendant, and received KRW 40 million from the said Agricultural Cooperative Account on September 19, 2012.

Accordingly, the defendant was given a total of KRW 70 million by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The protocol of statement of the police against D, the protocol of interrogation of the accused by the prosecution, and the statement of D;

1. Each investigation report and evidential materials attached thereto;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on recording of telephone conversations, CDs and recording of the same;

1. The circumstances favorable to the defendant are acknowledged, such as the pertinent legal provision on the crime, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the choice of punishment, the reason for sentencing the sentence of imprisonment option, the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime and reflects the mistake in depth, and the fact that there is no particular criminal record except once before and after the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

However, in light of the circumstances and contents of the instant crime and the number of damages, etc., it is inevitable to punish the Defendant in light of the following: (a) the degree of the offense is inferior and heavy; and (b) the Defendant has not made any effort to recover damage to the victim.

The age, character, conduct and environment of the defendant.