beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years and six months, and for a period of eight months, respectively.
Reasons
Criminal facts
Defendant
On March 5, 2015, A was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for fraud, violation of the Resident Registration Act, larceny, forgery of private documents, forgery of the above investigation document, and misappropriation of official document in support of the Daegu District Court Kimcheon on December 24, 2015, and was released as bail from the Daegu Detention House on December 24, 2015, and the execution of sentence was terminated around that time.
“2017 Highest 2998”: The Defendants conspired with M, N,O, and P (L is suspended on the same day, and the remainder is suspended on the same day) of each person in the name of the lender in order to obtain the information from the third person in the name of the lender by taking advantage of the third person’s name, who is in charge of the provision and delivery of the delivery place of the same person and the delivery of the same person in the name of the borrower, to sell the same voluntarily, to deduct the fee, to deliver the remaining purchase price to the lessee, and to obtain the information from the third person in the name of the lender in the manner of a "non-refluence".
1. On December 27, 2016, in collusion with D and M, the Defendants reported the advertisement of “S” at the Internet RDR (S) at the address of the Defendants in Ulsan-gu Q, Ulsan-gu around December 27, 2016, and told D to lend “inbound relief” amounting to KRW 1.2 million, the Defendants sent resident registration certificates, T card, and U head of Tong’s cell phone to the person inside the country of M with his/her residence and sent him/her to the victim of M’s residence. As the Defendant A was as if he/she was D, the Defendants made a false statement that “one person of Walma is the victim of Walma’s name” by phone to the victim of the victim’s name and the victim’s name and the victim’s name and payment of Walma amounting to KRW 209,400 for 39 months.
However, in fact, even if the Defendants were to receive the delivery of a massage by using the name of D, they did not think that they would pay a part of the sale amount to D after selling it, and there was no idea that the Defendants would pay the rental fee, and there was no intention or ability to pay the rental fee normally because they knew that D would not guarantee the normal payment of the rental fee.
Nevertheless, it is not appropriate.