However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant accepted a proposal that “to withdraw money remitted to the account of the political party” from a person who is not his name, and to allow the loan from the party.”

On March 24, 2017, the person who was unaware of the name was transferred 22 million won to the Saemaul Bank (Account Number: D) in the name of the defendant from the victim C (or 34 years of age) at a place where it is not known around March 24, 2017, and “in order to meet the loan conditions, the person who was unaware of the name shall repay the money borrowed from another loan company.”

Around that time, the Defendant received the order from the above person who was in the name of the Saemaul Bank, to withdraw the above amount of damage from the above 22 million won, and withdrawn 17 million won among the above 22 million won, and delivered it to the above person who was designated by the above person who was in the name of the deceased, and 5 million won out of 22 million won was transferred to the Agricultural Cooperative in the name of the second defendant, and then withdrawn from the point of view of the Agricultural Cooperative in the name of the second defendant, and then delivered to the male in the above name of the deceased.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by facilitating the fraud of the above-mentioned person without his name, has been prevented.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. A criminal investigation report (to attachCCTV data);

1. A written petition;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on public receipts;

1. Article 347 (1) and Article 32 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 34(2) and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act that reduces punishment for aiding and abetting;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following favorable circumstances):

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of Social Service Order: This case’s act of aiding and abetting and aiding and abetting a crime causing damage to many unspecified victims, such as Bosing, etc., is highly likely to criticize and punish the victim; the victim’s damage has not been recovered; there is no record of crime exceeding fines for the same kind of crime; and the Defendant acquired through this case’s crime.