If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

The Defendant was an employee of Company B and agreed with the representative director C to use the above money for the liquidation of the company while the above company was conducting liquidation due to the failure to conduct its business. However, the Defendant requested the above money to be lent to Company C and then the dispute occurred, thereby deceiving the victim D to use it as a direct receipt of the security deposit.

On May 6, 2011, at around 13:30, the Defendant created “E” in the e-mail address in the name of C, and demanded the said victim to send the e-mail to the said victim as if he/she was C, and to deposit KRW 27 million in the name of the Defendant with the account in the name of the Defendant, and then acquired the said victim by deceiving the said victim to transfer KRW 27 million to the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to C of the protocol of prosecutorial statement;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

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

1. Although the nature of the crime is not good in light of the method of sentencing and the degree of damage for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the amount of the fine shall be reduced partially as an element of sentencing favorable to the defendant, considering the fact that the defendant agreed with the victim, the circumstance and motive of the crime, etc., and there are circumstances that may take into account certain parts of the crime, and the sentence against the defendant