Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On June 27, 2019, the Defendant, through Home shopping in Dobong-gu Seoul, Dobong-gu, Seoul, a residence, concluded a siren agreement to repay the sum of KRW 1,16,100 per month from June 27, 2019 to September 26, 202 by 29,00 per month for a total of 39 months from June 27, 2019 to September 26, 202, on the credit card provided by the Defendant to pay KRW 1,16,100 by automatic settlement.

However, even if the defendant borrowed a siren, he did not have the intention or ability to pay the sirens to the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendant acquired the pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 1,166,100 in the way that the Defendant was in custody of the victim and received the sirens in the above residence, but did not pay the sirens in full.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. E statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to reports on criminal investigations (related to persons around the suspect) of sirens contracts and photographs of sirens;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the defendant and defense counsel of the provisional payment order denies the criminal intent of defraudation, because the defendant had the intent and ability to pay the sirens every month at the time of entering into the instant sirens contract, and therefore there is no fact that he acquired the amount equivalent to the sirens of this case from the victim.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, namely, ① the Defendant did not pay the credit card provided to the victim as a means of settlement of the instant siren for any excess of the first settlement date from July 26, 2019. From August 7, 2019, the Defendant was using an art suspension card, which was only one time payment.