On July 15, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud at the Incheon District Court, and completed the enforcement of the above sentence on May 23, 2017.

The Defendant around 12:53 on July 1, 2017, at the “E” office for the victim’s operation “E” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul and the first floor, and the Defendant’s “CNON 5D MAR2 (S/N 0530313786)”) and the Defendant’s “CNO EF 24-70m f/2.8m 2 (S/N 34002152)” leased from the victim for 14:0 to 24 hours on July 2, 2017 and returned to the victim up to 14:0 on July 2, 2017.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed the above Kameras and one siren from the injured party, he was trying to use the above Kameras to cover the living expenses of the deceased and did not intend to return it.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received from the victim one above Kamera and one sirens equivalent to KRW 5,073,970 from the victim, and fraudulently acquired them.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Written statements prepared by D;

1. Investigation report (related to the distribution of damaged articles);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: References to inquiries, such as criminal history, investigation reports (verification of repeated crimes), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the personal confinement status;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Reasons for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment on the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] general fraud (less than KRW 100 million) and the aggravated area (one year to two years) [the person subject to special aggravated punishment] of the same type of repeated crime;

2. In view of the fact that the Defendant, who was sentenced to imprisonment for the same kind of crime under the same law, was released from prison, and the Defendant again committed the instant crime, and that the injury has not been recovered, a sentence of imprisonment is inevitable.

However, in consideration of all the circumstances shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, the defendant has been led to the confession of the crime of this case and the mistake is divided.