“2019 Highest 499

At the same time, the Defendant, along with C and D, stolen the cell phone stored in the mobile phone agency and moved the cell phone to the place of crime by using E radar cars prepared by D, and D reported the network from the vehicle, and the Defendant and C attempted to destroy the door, etc. which is favorable to the mobile phone agency, and to steal the cell phone by entering the door.

A. On December 18, 2018, the Defendant, along with C and D around 03:53, around 03:53, 2018, came to “H operated by the victim G in Kimhae-siF,” D reported the network from the above radar car, and C damaged the entrance door by using the network, and the Defendant attempted to steal the cell phone by intrusioning into it as C and then destroying the cell phone, but did not commit an attempted crime without discovering the cell phone.

B. Around 12, 19:05 on January 12, 2018, the Defendant, along with C and D, came to “K operated by the victim J in the Busan Eastdong-gu, Busan, and D reported the network from the above radar vehicle, and the Defendant and C attempted to steal a mobile phone by placing the door door up to the string, forcing the door door up to the string, exposing the door into the string, and exposing it into the string, but attempted to steal a mobile phone by following the display stand, etc., but failed to find the cell phone, and subsequently attempted to do so.

C. Around 04:15 on the same day as C and D, the Defendant, along with C and D, destroyed the wall surface of the victim M in Suwon-gu L, Busan at around 04:15, and the Defendant tried to steal a mobile phone by inserting hand on the damaged wall surface and opening the display stand for the mobile phone, but it did not lead to an attempted attempt without correcting the display cost.

Accordingly, the defendant tried to steal the victims' property in collaboration with C and D, but he attempted to do so.

2. Special larceny;

A. At around 04:30 on December 19, 2018, the Defendant, along with C and D, damaged the reinforcement glass of the entrance in the way as referred to in the above paragraph (a) of Article 1, and the Defendant intruded into the same as C, and damaged the 363,000 won of the market price of the victim’s possession in the display stand, which is the victim’s possession in the display stand, and then stored in the display stand, and lost the total amount of KRW 3,828,00 of KRW 3,828,00 of the market price of Samsung GG G GGG G9 cell phone 4, the total market price of KRW 3,99,20, KRW 3,995,00, KRW 3,995, and KRW 1,094,00 of the market price of Samsung GG G G9 mobile phone total amounting to KRW 91,00,000, KRW 108,000.

B. The Defendant, along with C and D, committed a “S operated by the Victim R R in Q from around 06:19 to 06:25 on the same day as C and D, and committed a damage to the wall that became a common glass of the above agency in accordance with paragraph (a) of paragraph (1) of the above Article, and intruded into the wall and stored in the display stand.

The Defendant and the Defendant reported Samsung 2,00, the total value of Samsung 2,96,40 won of Samsung 2,00, the total market value of Samsung 2,00, the total value of Samsung 3,000 won of Samsung 2,000, the total market value of Samsung 1,797,400 won of Samsung 2, the total market value of Samsung 3,000 won of Samsung 2, the total value of Samsung 3,000, and the total value of Samsung 1,79,000, and the total market value of Samsung 1,79,000, and the total market value of Samsung 2, the total value of Samsung 3,000,000, and the total market value of Samsung 2, the total market value of Samsung 1,797,000,0000, and the total market value of Samsung 9,000,000 won of Samsung 3,000

3. Fraud;

On December 19, 2018, the Defendant, along with C and D, was “X gas station operated by the victim’s name in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Masan-si.” In doing so as to make an employee Y pay for the gas station, the Defendant paid 39,000 won to the said passenger car. However, the Defendants did not have any intent or ability to pay for the gas station even if it was paid for the gas station.

The Defendant, in collusion with C and D, by deceiving Y as above, was supplied with gasoline equivalent to KRW 39,00,00 at the market price of the victim’s possession. The Defendant was supplied with gasoline equivalent to KRW 39,00,00.

On October 27, 2018, the Defendant: (a) made a false statement to the victim AA who became aware of through an investment car page in the second B-dong, Daejeon, Daejeon; (b) made a loan by a vehicle as security; (c) received interest thereon; and (d) obtained profits from the vehicle. In making an investment, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “50% of the monthly revenue shall be paid and the principal shall be returned immediately after receiving a refund of the loan.” (d) around November 27, 2018, the Defendant drafted an investment agreement for the victim and the vehicle security loan and the rental business.” (e) around November 27, 2018.

However, even if the defendant receives the investment money from the victim, the defendant did not have an intention or ability to provide the victim with the investment profits agreed to use the part of the investment money, the proceeds from the vehicle-backed loan and the rental business as an Internet gambling fund or living expenses, and to guarantee the principal.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 9 million from the victim as investment money on October 15, 2018, KRW 9 million on or around the 18th of the same month, KRW 4.5 million on or around the 22th of the same month, KRW 1.3 million on or around November 23 of the same year, KRW 1.3 million on or around the 28th of the same month, KRW 9.5 million on or around the 28th of the same month, KRW 8.5 million on or around December 3 of the same year, and KRW 1.5 million on or around the 11th of the same month from the Defendant’s mother, respectively, and acquired KRW 433 million on or around the 15 million from the Busan Bank account (AC) in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol concerning suspect interrogation of C;

1. Each police statement made to AD, AE, AF, and A;

1. Each statement;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Each photograph and each CCTV image;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report and internal investigation report;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of each special larceny), Articles 342, 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of each special larceny), Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of each special larceny), Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint fraud), Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of each single larceny), selection of each imprisonment penalty

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall be based on the following circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, personality and conduct, family relationship, motive for, means and method of committing a crime, result of a crime, circumstances after committing a crime, etc., and the sentence as ordered.

Normal circumstances favorable to ○: A confession and reflect, and a normal situation unfavorable to some victims: A repeated crime of special larceny has been committed, the amount of theft damage and the amount of fraud damage cannot be said to be small, and a criminal record of the same kind has been committed.