The defendant is a middle school ward, and from December 2014, the defendant was a school with the victim C, and it became a school with the victim on the premise of marriage.

During the period of teaching with the victim, the defendant was committed in both ways that possess considerable property, such as apartment and high-class automobiles in Seoul Metropolitan City during the educational system, and was willing to obtain money from the victim by iceing marriage.

Therefore, around May 15, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would lend money to the victim to make a stock investment. If four times the money is needed, the Defendant would return the money immediately to lurt.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, he did not have any intention or ability to repay the borrowed money, there is no particular hospitalization or property.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 10 million from the victim in the name of one bank account (Account Number: D) in the name of the Defendant on the same day.

In addition, the Defendant received a total of KRW 41,50,000 from the victim to July 23, 2015 as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table from the victim to July 23, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as remittance data;

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (Fraud, choice of imprisonment), which has the reason for sentencing, have committed an offense by abusing the personal trust relationship with the victim, and even though the amount acquired by deceit from the victim is not a large amount, the damage has not been properly restored until now.

Even though a criminal record does not have the same criminal record, he/she has been punished several times for a crime of different species in the past.

In order to reach an agreement prior to the pronouncement of the instant judgment, the attitude of unlimited liability, such as continuing contact and throwing away, after being granted a grace period.