beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal history] On September 17, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in the Vice-Support of the Incheon District Court (Seoul District Court) and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 12, 2015, and on June 29, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of suspension of execution on September 29, 2012, and was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a crime of fraud on September 29, 2012.
[2] On August 1, 2008, the Defendant made a false statement that “F, at the office of “D,” the victim E and E’s seated in the Seocho-si, the Defendant would be able to obtain a loan of at least KRW 2 billion from the domestic mutual savings bank of the Republic of Korea in the territory of the Republic of Korea, and it would be necessary to obtain a loan of at least KRW 80 million from the domestic mutual savings bank of the Republic of Korea in the territory of the Republic of Korea.”
However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to receive a loan even if he received the premium from the damaged person.
On August 12, 2008, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; and (b) transferred KRW 40 million to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of G, the Defendant’s seat on August 12, 2008.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Statement made by the police for E;
1. A copy of bankbook;
1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of inquiry letter, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment, etc. of a copy of written judgment by suspect);
1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;
2. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act: Provided, That the reason for sentencing under Article 39(1) is against the Defendant’s wrongness; the case for which the instant judgment became final and the case for which the instant crime was committed has some favorable circumstances, such as the relationship between the two concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, but the sentence is imposed unless the damage has been restored.