Around 17:00 on March 5, 2016, the Defendant sent a phone call to the victim B at a place where it is difficult to know, and concluded that “I will complete payment by the end of April if I lend KRW 650,000 to the victim B because I want to leave the mobile phone, and C head office does not go to the audit by cutting the mobile phone on the face of the audit.”

However, the defendant did not operate a mobile phone store, and even if he borrowed money for the purpose of purchasing mobile phone machines, he thought to use it as living expenses, etc., and there was no intention or ability to repay the money borrowed from the victim due to no certain income at the time.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 6.5 million won from the victim to the E bank account (F) in the name of the Defendant, who is the child of the Defendant on the same day, and received 74.8 million won in total from that time until April 5, 2017, as shown in the list of crimes, from that time.

As a result, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each investigation report (the No. 12,22, 31, 35, 37 of the evidence list);

1. A detailed statement of deposit transactions (Evidence Nos. 3) and a detailed statement of transactions;

1. Details of transactions in each account (the sequence 32,33 of evidence lists);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a certificate of borrowing;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crimes. Article 347 (Selection of Imprisonment or Imprisonment);

1. Of concurrent offenders, the crime of this case committed for the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act was thought to be used not for the Defendant’s purchase cost of cell phones or the payment of bonds, but for the Defendant’s credit card payment or living cost, etc., and there was no certain income at the time.