According to the above public offering on January 13, 2015, C sent an identification card to the victim using PP in Gwangju Franchis North, using PP on January 13, 2015, saying, “If the victim sent the identification card, he/she shall open his/her cell phone and use and terminate it for only three months, and on the 16th of the same month, he/she shall collect the identification card from the damaged person by facsimile, and the Defendant received the identification card from C and opened one cell phone (G) in the name of the victim at the “F agency” located in PPE on January 29, 2015.

However, even if the defendant and C opened a mobile phone in the name of the victim, they did not intend to sell it immediately, but did not normally pay the mobile phone price and telephone fee or terminate it three months after the opening of the mobile phone in the name of the victim.

In collusion with C, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, prevented the victim from paying a sum of KRW 903,190, such as the amount of short-term payment from the victim, thereby acquiring property profits equivalent to the same amount.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserts that he also introduced friendships from H to lending his name through C, etc., and that he did not cause damage in collusion with C, etc.

B. According to the witness D and C’s respective legal statements, it was said that C intended to open a cell phone in the name of D, and C appears to have heard the talk about the company professionalization from H and transmitted it to H with D’s identification card. In addition to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is insufficient to recognize the charges of deceiving the Defendant in collusion with C (in particular, H is prosecuted against the Defendant on February 29, 2016 on the ground that the Defendant committed the crime of fraud).