On July 26, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud at the Daegu District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 6, 2018.

On January 10, 2017, the Defendant reported to D the Defendant’s office located in the Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan Government B building C, on the advertisement “the occurrence of KRW 50,000 per day when investing KRW 10 million,000,000,000 per day,” and falsely stated that “The Defendant would pay 30-40% per month for futures investment. If investing KRW 10,000,000,00,000 per month, 10% interest per month shall be paid, and the principal shall be repaid after one year.”

However, in fact, the Defendant had no particular revenue or property in addition to the vague expectation that the Defendant would be able to pay the interest and principal for each month of profits due to uncertain futures trading. The Defendant had a debt equivalent to KRW 600 million. The Defendant was aware that the amount invested in the victim was used for office rent, investment dividends to other investors, repayment of personal debt, etc., and thus, there was no intention or ability to pay interest and principal even if receiving money from the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of the Defendant, transferred KRW 10 million around January 10, 2017 and KRW 10 million around March 24, 2017, and acquired KRW 20 million in total from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each certificate of borrowing;

1. Previous records before ruling: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports and investigation reports (the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act competition, etc.)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The sentencing of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act on the treatment of concurrent crimes did not properly recover from the damage caused by the crime.

The defendant has been punished 12 times in total, including criminal records for the same crime.

However, the defendant is recognized to commit crimes.

Defendant.