On December 2, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the Defendant’s house located in Ansan-si, 116 dong B, 902, which had been known at the Internet club using a hosting room of the Internet hosting program (C) to the victim D, who had been aware of at the Internet club, stating that “The Ministry of Strategy and Finance employees with the same Ministry of Strategy and Finance have made a lot of profits from the success in the stock investment. (b) If the transfer of stock investment funds to the said employees, the Defendant would make a lot of profits from the investment of stocks upon request of the said employees.

However, there was no intention or ability to pay profits by investing in stocks even though the defendant is not a public official of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance and is not a public official of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance and has received money from the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained KRW 2 million from the victim on February 1, 2012, KRW 10 million on the 6th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 7th day of the same month, KRW 5 million on the 8th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 13th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 14th day of the same month, KRW 16th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 17th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 17th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 18th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 19th day of the same month, KRW 10 million on the 20th day of the same month, and KRW 12 million on the 5 million on the 20th day of the same month.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint (including the portion attached to a certificate of payment, etc.);

1. The relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act governing the crime and Article 347(1) of the option of punishment are more than 100 million won, and the method of deception also assumes a false status, and thus, are more severe;

Although the agreement has been reached, the amount of actual damage compensation has not yet been made, taking into account all the circumstances to be considered in the sentencing, such as the circumstances of this case including the method of deception and the amount of deception, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing was determined as ordered.