[Criminal Power] On April 18, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Suwon District Court Eunpyeong Housing Site Board, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 23, 2019.

【Criminal Facts】

On January 26, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C in Pyeongtaek-si located in Pyeongtaek-si B, stating that “I will receive KRW 20 billion of the share of money within the token D, and if I lend KRW 150 million to the victim, I will pay the interest of KRW 20% until February 28, 2017.”

However, the defendant did not have any occupation or special property, and even if he borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to repay it at the due date.

Nevertheless, on January 26, 2017, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) received 80 million won from the victim to the account in the name of E, a mother of the Defendant, under the pretext of borrowing money; and (c) received 89,276,500 won in total over 12 times from around that time to December 19, 2017, as shown in the separate crime list.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired the victim's property by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. A complaint;

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the defendant's legal statement, criminal records, and investigation reports (the progress of the case pending);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Consideration should take into account the equity with the case where the judgment was rendered simultaneously with the judgment on the grounds of sentencing under the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the confession and rebuttal of the instant crime, and the fact that there is a family member to support the instant crime.

On the other hand, even though there was a history of punishment for the same crime several times, the amount of damage in this case is the larger amount than 89 million won, and it was not used by the victim.