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

Punishment of the crime

On June 25, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment of one year and six months for fraud in the Daegu District Court Port Branch branch on June 25, 2009, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on August 17, 2010.

On January 13, 2013, at the home of the defendant who was living together with the defendant on January 13, 2013, the defendant lacks any balance in purchasing the land in the Gyeonggi-dopocheon-do.

If only KRW 30 million is lent, repayment will be made until the end of April.

Since the literature property has property of 7 billion won, such as 2.8 billion won in Seocho-gu Seoul and 2.3 billion won in Seocho-gu, it is believed and changed.

However, the defendant did not have any property under his/her name, and even if he/she borrowed money under the pretext of loans, living expenses, hospital expenses, etc. due to no financial condition, he/she did not have any intent or ability to repay the money.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received 6 million won from the victim to the Saemaul Treasury account (Account Number:F) in the name of the Defendant, and received 8,954 million won in total over 30 times from around that time to September 25, 2013, as shown in the list of crimes, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of each part of the protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution against the accused (including the part concerning the testimony of theM)

1. Statement made by the police against M;

1. Details of transactions of each passbook, details of loans, details of transactions of passbooks, details of transactions, details of financial transactions, details of card transactions, and details of transactions of passbooks;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: References to inquiries, such as criminal history, investigation reports (verification of repeated crimes, etc.), and application of the text of the judgment;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act and Article 347 of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The crime of fraud in this case under Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes is deemed to be a single crime since the victim is the same and the criminal intent is single and the method of crime is deemed to be identical in light of the period, frequency, method, etc. of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2029, Jul. 12, 2002).