A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

An application for remedy order shall be dismissed by an applicant for remedy order.

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 15, 2014, the Defendant, at the residence of the Defendant No. D 204 at Sinti City, Sinti City around 15, 2014, taken off one copy of the thief’s C Bank C’s C’s C’s C’s C’s C’s C’s C’s wall crebing

In the cash payment period of the BGF Capital Management, which is set up in the Mart, 1, 201, from that time until December 1, 2014, thefted total of KRW 1,790,00 by the same method, including inserting 2.50,000 won, and withdrawing 2.50,000 won, from that time, from that time to December 1, 2014.

2. On June 15, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around June 15, 2014, in the same manner as the entry in paragraph (1) in the residence of the above Defendant; and (b) in the same manner, in a new card.

In addition, from November 16, 2014 to November 16, 2014, he/she acquired 1,707,000 won through six times in total, including the case where he/she acquired 1,60,000 won from the damaged person by presenting and settling the said card as if he/she has a legitimate settlement authority.

3. The Defendant in violation of the Act on Financial Business Specializing in Credit was using stolen credit cards in the name of C, such as the date and place specified in paragraph 2, as in attached Table 2.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of the details of bankbooks and Acts and subordinate statutes on cards;

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to facts constituting an offense (the point of fraud), Article 329 of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Article 70(1)3 (the point of illegality of credit card) of the Act on Business Specializing in Credit Finance, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 25(3)3 and Article 32(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits to Reject an application for compensation order [ though the legal reasoning exists, the applicant for compensation order and the victims stated in the facts charged are different, and the amount of damage stated in the application for compensation order and the amount of the application for compensation order and the facts charged.