Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On December 22, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months at the Suwon District Court for fraud, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 30, 2017.

【Criminal Facts】

On June 8, 2017, the Defendant told the victim C’s office located in Pyeongtaek-si B that “on the face of KRW 22 million, the Defendant would accept one printing machine and transfer it to the victim by June 30, 2017.”

However, in fact, the above printing machine was owned by D, not by the defendant, and D did not say that it would sell the printing machine to the defendant, so even if the victim received the printing price from the victim, it did not have the intent or ability to transfer it to the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendant deceptioned the victim as above, and then acquired 5 million won in total from the victim to the corporate bank account (F) in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. on June 8, 2017, and 17 million won in total from July 3, 2017 to the corporate bank account in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. (G) and acquired 22 million won in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statement of the defendant (which is made on the sixth trial date);

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Statement made to A by the police;

1. A sales contract, an electronic tax invoice, and a statement of results of transfer;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as criminal history records, investigation reports (verification of the same type of power and the facts during the current suspension of execution), written judgments, etc.;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The fact that there are many criminal records of the same type of frauds against the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is disadvantageous to the defendant, but the fact that do not have any criminal intent, the fact that the victim agreed smoothly with the victim, the principle of equity with the case that the defendant was tried together with the judgment in a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act shall be considered.