The defendant pays 117,900,000 won to the applicant through fraud.

On May 4, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for embezzlement by the Ulsan District Court on May 4, 2018, and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 12, 2018.

"2017 Highest 557"

1. The Defendant was a person who had been, from June 2014, had been, between victim D and his/her chain, living together at the victim D’s house from November 17, 2014.

On July 2014, the Defendant, at the home of the victim D, who was in custody of the victim E, who was in custody of the cremation for the said location at the time of the Defendant’s release from the Defendant’s house located in the Gyeong-gun, left one female roller, who was in the market value of KRW 43 million.

From around that time to August 2014, the Defendant stolen the property equivalent to KRW 88 million in total, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table (1) from around three times to the police officer in the middle of August 2014, respectively.

2. The Defendant of a private document forgery was a person who was F and work partner, who used a mobile phone and account in F’s name and used the F’s resident registration number in F’s name and used it for lending in F’s name.

On July 24, 2014, the Defendant entered “G” as F’s resident registration number in the resident registration number column of a loan transaction agreement (for customers) received from Apropy social loan (for customers) without any authority at around 14:00 and at the non-permanent point of the trade name located in Young-gun, Young-si, Gyeongnam-si, and entered “F” in the customer name column.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a copy of a loan transaction agreement in F, a private document related to rights and obligations.

3. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in paragraph 2, sent a forged loan transaction agreement to an employee in charge of social loans (ju) who is aware of the forgery at the time and place, as described in paragraph 2, to facsimile as if it were duly formed.

4. Fraud;

A. The Defendant’s fraud against a victim’s social loan (state) is a phone call to an employee of a victim’s professional loan (state) at the date, time, and place specified in paragraph 2.