On September 30, 2016, the Defendant sent the Defendant’s account number to the non-party name who gave a loan, withdrawn the amount of damage to the victims deposited into the said account and delivered it to the non-party name. On September 30, 2016, around 11:00, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 17950,000,000 from the agricultural branch of Thai-gu, No. 3-20,000,000 from the 13:05,000,000 won to the Defendant’s agricultural bank account (F) on the same day, and then returned the amount of damage to C to the non-party name.

Accordingly, the name indisscam shall be obtained from the victim E by deceiving the victim E, and 5 million won from the victim C, respectively. While recognizing the fact that the above name inscams et al. are committed, the defendant, while recognizing the fact that the above name inscams et al. are prevented, he withdrawn cash and delivered it to the name inscams, thereby facilitating the fraud of the inscams.

2. Determination

A. The gist of the Defendant’s and the defense counsel’s assertion lies in the fact that the Defendant withdrawn the money as stated in the facts charged and delivered the money to the needy.

However, in order to obtain a loan, the Defendant only withdrawn and delivered the money that entered into the account under the name of the Defendant according to the direction of the person without a name that he/she should create a transaction performance, and he/she is aware that the Defendant’s act is easy to commit a telephone financing fraud.