1. 2009. 5. 6.자 범행 피고인은 2009. 5. 6.경 남양주시 C에 있는 ‘D‘라는 사찰에서 불교공부를 하며 알게 된 피해자 E에게 “우리 둘째딸이 내년초에 호텔에서 결혼을 한다. 결혼자금이 조금 모자라니 3,000만 원만 빌려달라. 우리 시댁과 친정에서 바로 도와줄 것이니 금방 갚을 수 있을 것이다. 우리 딸이 가게를 하는데 보증금이 8,000만 원 정도 되고, 나한테 20억짜리 집도 있으니 믿고 빌려 달라.”고 말하였다.

However, the Defendant is a usual family owner, and there was no other property except for the total amount of KRW 130 million of the deposit of the deposit of the deposit of the deposit of the deposit of the house of Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and there was no intention or ability to repay the deposit even if he borrows the money from the victim.

On May 8, 2009, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 30 million from the victim to the post office account under the name of the Defendant, under the name of the Defendant.

2. 2009. 8. 31.자 범행 피고인은 2009. 8. 31.경 위 사찰에서 위 피해자에게 “우리 딸 시댁이 부자라서 신혼집이 워낙 크다. 지난번에 준 돈은 리모델링과 인테리어 비용으로 다 썼다. 돈을 조금만 더 빌려 달라. 바로 갚아 주겠다.“라고 거짓말하였다.

On August 31, 2009, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 30 million from the said post office account as the borrowed money.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on details of transfers;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. From among concurrent crimes, even though there have been a long time from the time when the amount of damage for sentencing was received without a significant number of damage for the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, the defendant is unable to recover the damage, and the investigation and trial procedures are conducted by the defendant.