[2013 Highest 8476]

1. On March 5, 2013, the Defendant posted a letter on the Internet NVV I car page that he sold merchandise coupons, and reported it to the victim J, who reported and contacted it, sent the victim J 30% discount price of the 30% discount price, such as health functional foods, taxation, and fry drugs, which are “Ciwa” and “Ciwa” online items purchase, thereby demanding credit card settlement by pretending that they purchase items at the Internet items.

However, even if the victim makes such payment, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to sell the “Crweg” product to the victim.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above, and has the victim under his jurisdiction do so in the same month.

6. Having 4,984,875 won settled and acquired pecuniary profits equivalent to the same amount.

2. On March 2013, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant would sell KRW 88,500,000 per lot department store gift certificates to KRW 88,500 per head of the charge” to the victim during his/her continuous contact with the said victim, which was closed on or around the first day of March 2013, the Defendant first requested the remittance of the payment to Chapter 100.

However, even if the defendant receives money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to sell the department store merchandise coupons.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 10 million from the victim, to the Agricultural Cooperative Account of K’s mother on the 14th of the same month.

[2014 Highest 203] Around January 30, 2013, the Defendant posted a notice to sell merchandise coupons at a discount on the Internet soup site ( interspak.co.kr) at a soup site located in the Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Incheon, stating that he sent merchandise coupons if he deposits money to the victim L who reported this fact and made contact, he sent the merchandise coupon.

However, there was no intention or ability to send merchandise coupons even if the defendant received money from the victim as the price for merchandise coupons from the beginning because the defendant did not have merchandise coupons from the beginning.

The defendant belongs to this.