The Defendant used money on the premise of marriage by hiding the fact that C (herely married wife on October 31, 2010) and lending the money on the premise of marriage. However, the Defendant had no intent or ability to repay the money even if he/she borrowed money from the victim because it is difficult to live with monthly income of KRW 100-1.5 million due to the failure to pay vehicle installments and loans, etc. on the premise of marriage.

Nevertheless, on November 6, 2009, the Defendant called the victim in Daegu Northern-gu E and received KRW 9 million from the victim who believed that “I will not have any funds for opening the Maguri-gu business, write down several months, and return them.”

In addition, the Defendant, from around that time to December 28, 2012, by deceiving the victim as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Form, and was given a total of KRW 178,305,163 from the victim over a total of 102 occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of the statutes governing the details of transactions in agricultural cooperatives, Daegu Bank Agreements, and the details of transactions in new cooperatives;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. According to the sentencing guidelines under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent offenders, each of the crimes in this case constitutes Type 2 (not less than KRW 100,000 but less than KRW 500,00) among the general frauds of the fraud group, and the scope of recommending punishment is from 1 year to 7 years (basic area).

Although the defendant led to a crime, and reflects it, the period of the crime is reasonable, and the amount of damage is against the considerable amount of damage, and the defendant is sentenced to punishment due to the failure to pay the damage properly.