On March 5, 2015, at around 23:30 on March 5, 2015, the Defendant called the victim B to use the phone to drive the car with drinking alcohol, and attempted to receive cash services in order to prepare the amount of damage caused by the accident. However, the Defendant would have paid off money if there is a difference in money.

“.......”

However, the defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay money even if he borrowed money from the injured party because he received money from the injured party, paid his personal debt, and attempted to use it as personal expenses.

On March 6, 2015, the Defendant acquired the property from the damaged person to the account under the name of the Defendant and acquired the property from him/her, as well as from around that time to October 8, 2015, the Defendant acquired the total amount of KRW 147,417,310 to the victim by the same method eight times, such as the list of crimes in attached Form 1.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. Complaint;

1. Application of statutes on personal credit information;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment (elective of imprisonment);

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act, as the punishment for concurrent crimes;

1. Type 2 (at least KRW 100, but less than KRW 500,00) basic areas (from August to April) of the sentencing guidelines: No increase in one step-by-class (special sentencing factors) as a result of the addition of identical concurrent crimes;

2. Circumstances favorable to the determination of sentence: The fact that the defendant recognizes all of the crimes of this case and reflects it, and that there is no record of criminal punishment against the defendant: The crime of this case is not good that the defendant acquired money through several times against the female-friendly Gu in which the defendant was replaced by using the trust relationship;