[2016 Highest 731] The defendant is a person in charge of sale in Haart C.

On June 6, 2016, the Defendant sent the sales proceeds of te to the victim E via a mobile phone and text message from the point of Haart C, which is at a price lower than 2.4 million won at the normal selling price, to 1.6 million won per 1,60,000 won, from which the Defendant sold te, to the private account.

D. The phrase “assumed” made a false statement to the effect that “.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have the authority to sell electronic equipment at a discounted price than the normal sale price, and the sales price received from the injured party was thought to be used at the Internet illegal gambling site, so there was no intention or ability to deliver electronic equipment normally even if the sales price was paid.

The Defendant received 16,200,000 won as sales proceeds corresponding to 10,000 won in the account of the National Bank Account (F) in the name of the Defendant from the injured party, but delivered 60,000 won in the laundry season and delivered the remaining 4 parts, thereby acquiring the amount equivalent to 6,40,000 won.

From that time until June 28, 2016, the Defendant acquired the total sum of KRW 63.2 million from the damaged party, as shown in the attached Table (1) in the foregoing manner, 11 times, such as the previous Table (1).

[2017 Highest 451] The defendant is a person in charge of sale in Haart C.

On May 2016, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant would deliver Samsung 65 custody television to KRW 1,450,000 per unit of Samsung 65 custody television and KRW 1,600,00 per unit of El 1,50,000.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have the authority to sell electronic equipment at a lower price than the normal selling price, and even if the sales proceeds are paid from the injured party, the other transaction parties, other than the injured party, are not victims.