Seized evidence 3 through 9 shall be confiscated.

[2016 High Order 1521] The Defendant, upon receiving an order from an employee of the Kakao Stockholm, withdrawn money remitted from the commission of fraud as follows, and then delivered it to the staff of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission of the commission

피고인은 성명 불상의 범죄 조직원인 일명 ‘D ’으로부터 중국의 모바일 메신저 위 챗 (we chat) 을 통하여 지시를 받고 버스 수하물 운송서비스를 통하여 위 D이 알려 준 장소에서 위와 같은 예금카드를 건네받아 순천 일대를 다니면서 현금 지급기에서 현금을 인출한 다음, 그 돈을 다시 위 D이 지시한 계좌로 무통장 입금 하는 등의 방법으로 송금하는 역할을 담당하여 성명 불상의 조직원들과 공모하였다.

On May 30, 2015, a person whose name was the cause of the organization, posted a letter stating that he sells 12,000 won of merchandise coupons 100,000 on the Internet website of the Internet site of the Internet site of the Internet site of the Internet site of the Internet site of the Internet site of the Internet, and the victim E who reported the above letter sold the merchandise coupons of 950,000 won as if he had sold the said merchandise coupons of KRW 950,00,000 to the national bank account (G) in the name of F for merchandise coupons around May 30, 2016. The defendant withdrawn the money deposited by the victim and remitted the above money to the account designated by the person who was not the victim’s name.