beta
Text
[Defendant A] The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.
However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date of the final judgment.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Part of the facts charged is revised to the extent that it is not disadvantageous to the Defendants’ exercise of their defense rights.
On April 17, 2018, Defendant C was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment for fraud and 2 years of suspended execution on April 17, 2018, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on the 25th of the same month.
1. Defendant A, B, and C had falsely posted a false letter on the Internet’s trading website, and had the intent to defraud the price. Defendant B, and Defendant C posted a false letter on the said website, and Defendant A conspired to take charge of the withdrawal of the money remitted from the victims. On August 29, 2017, Defendant A posted a false letter on the Internet Hcar I bulletin board in Busan Northern-gu, Busan, to sell a mobile phone on the Internet Hcar I, and the victimJ who reported and contacted the fact that “I will send the goods if you transfer KRW 170,000 to the K bank account L No. 170,000 in the name of the victim.”
However, in fact, there was no intention or ability to send the above article even with money from the victim.
Defendant
A, B, and C shall act in collusion with the victim to receive KRW 170,000 from the victim for the same day as the price for goods on the same day, and a list of crimes committed in attached Form from that time to September 21, 2017
1. The sum of KRW 3,410,00,00 in total over 21 occasions as described, was transferred to the K Bank account under the name of Defendant A (L), the post office account (M), and the N Bank account (O).
"2018 Highest 2742"
2. On September 10, 2018, Defendant C posted a mobile phone sales text on the HI website and reported it to the victim P who visited Defendant C by saying, “I would deliver a mobile phone of KRW 320,000 to the victim P who wired the remittance of KRW 320,000.”
However, there was no intention or ability to sell a mobile phone because the defendant C did not have a mobile phone.
Defendant
C In such a way as above, by deceiving the victim, and then deceiving the victim, 320,000 was remitted from the victim to the Qua (R) account in the name of Defendant C.
3. The defendant C is the defendant C.