When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On January 3, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “the Defendant will work from January 6, 2015 to a 3,300,000 won in advance,” from the D tea operated by the victim C in the racing-si.

However, in fact, the defendant was thought to receive money from the injured party in excess of his/her debt and did not have the intent or ability to perform his/her work at the injured party.

On January 5, 2015, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received 3.3 million won from the victim’s account in the name of E (Account Number:F) from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim to take the property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to police statement protocol (including a copy of passbook) to C;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. In light of the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, background, means and consequence of the crime, the records, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the criminal records of the Defendant’s same kind of crime, sentencing cases in similar cases, etc., the amount of fine specified in the summary order is not acknowledged to be excessive, and there is no change of circumstances that may be considered after the summary order, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by maintaining the amount of fine under the summary order.