A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that he did not commit the instant fraud, and that H, which was around April 13, 2018, committed a fraud by using the Defendant’s mobile phone, was denied. However, in light of the following circumstances, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant’s appeal cannot be trusted, and that the Defendant committed the instant fraud.

① The Defendant reversed the statement from an investigative agency to the court of the court below. While the Defendant is a person with intellectual disability, the language, history, attitude, etc. are different from those of a person with no disability.

② At an investigative agency and a court of original instance, H consistently stated that no one had committed the instant fraud by lending his mobile phone from the Defendant, and stated that H’s pro-Japanese PP did not appear to have been witnessed in committing the “beatd” game, thereby complying with H’s statement.

③ In light of the fact that the offender committed the instant fraud sent the message demanding the victim to send the game items to the Kakaox, and did not keep the message at all, and the victim knew of the damage caused by the fraud, and then, the Defendant confirmed that the Defendant sent the text message that the Defendant did not keep at all with the Defendant, and the Defendant stated at the prosecutor’s office that the Defendant sent the text message to the victim without using it, it can be seen that the victim was the Defendant by dividing the conversation for the first game items transaction.

④ In light of the text received and sent by the Defendant and the victim, the Defendant appears to have already been aware of the instant fraud crime before the victim resists, and the victim is an offender of the fraud crime.