Co-defendant B, C, and D received money for certifying balance of deposits from victim E to the account in the name of the defendant, and then applied for mobile banking with respect to the above account between the victim and the victim's knowledge, and conspired to use money for certifying balance of deposits by telephone transfer to another account.

D) On February 201, 201, it proposed that C would give 40% of the amount of fraud on the face of the nominal owner of the corporation, and C would introduce D the Defendant, the nominal owner of the corporation, and D would establish a corporation that sent text messages in the name of the Defendant to B along with the Defendant’s office of a certified judicial scrivener. After entrusting B with opening an account for certifying balance of deposits in the name of the Defendant necessary for the establishment of a corporation, it ordered C to create another account (H of Busan Bank) in the name of the Defendant to transfer money for proving balance of deposits in the name of the Defendant.

Accordingly, around 17:50 on February 23, 201, B and the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “A corporation that carries on the business of mass delivery in the name of the Defendant will immediately return KRW 100 million borrowed from the account in the name of the Defendant after obtaining a certificate of deposit balance in the name of the Defendant, as the certificate of deposit balance in the name of the Defendant is required to be transferred to the account in the name of the Defendant.”

However, in fact, when the defendant, B, C, and D did not have any human and physical facilities for the letter delivery business and deposited money in the account for the balance sheet certificate in the name of the defendant who entrusted the establishment, the victim applied for the mobile banking in the future and did not have any intent or ability to return KRW 100 million to another account (H).

The Defendant, B, C, and D are as above.