The Defendant, from February 8, 2017 to October 2017, 2017, was operating a sales store for the diveston goods in the name of “E” in Sejong Special Self-Governing City D.

On March 2, 2017, the Defendant rendered a telephone to the victim F who became aware of in a place where it is impossible to know at the time of a special self-government of Sejong-type, the Defendant: “The father in the Republic of Korea operates the insignia, and the five-story building is transferred to B.

Our house has a lot of money.

In order to carry on the cargo vehicle storage business, the raw materials will be leased to the cargo vehicle storage business and the payment shall be made within a week per week.

“.....”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the loan because it received money from the injured party, and the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the loan because it did not have any other obligation such as the lending company or use it as the cost of living.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 7.5 million from the Defendant’s wife G account (Account Number: H) on the same day from the victim, and acquired KRW 330,427,60 in total on 23 occasions from around that time to November 9, 2017, such as the transfer of KRW 7.5 million from the Defendant’s Defendant’s wife G account (H).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution (including F substituteness);

1. Each police statement made to F, I, and J;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report (including attachment of a credit statement and accompanying materials), each investigation report (to listen to oral statements of the complainant K/L/M), and investigation report (to listen to statements by a witness Nphone);

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Act on the Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Act on the Punishment of Concurrent Crimes are heavy and have not been agreed.

Personal trust relationship was used.

In this regard, the defendant's reflectivity, the past record of the fine is one time, and the crime is committed.