A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Criminal facts

The defendant became aware of the victim with the victim in the private house exclusively for women located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, where the victim B was dead.

On September 27, 2018, the Defendant sent a telephone to the victim in the Philippines, and called “Ire, Ien, Ien, Ien now, the Republic of Korea, but the card price settlement date will be increased. There is no balance in the passbook, and thereafter, the Defendant said that I would immediately deposit KRW 2 million in the territory of the Republic of Korea.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not own fixed income and assets at the time of borrowing and did not have any intent or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as above, received KRW 2 million from the victim’s bank account (Account Number: E) in the name of the Defendant from the victim, and received KRW 25 million in total from October 21 of the same year to October 21 of the same year as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, received the property and acquired it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement to the effect that the defendant has received money from the victim as stated in the ruling at the time set forth in this Court;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. A copy of a bankbook and a closure of the F Messenger;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on recording;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the relevant Article of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts, and the Defendant of the choice of imprisonment and defense counsel

1. Since the defendant and his defense counsel did not mention the defendant's specific repayment period, and the defendant borrowed money from the victim with the knowledge that he will repay the borrowed money in full, there is no intention to commit fraud.

2. The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the judgment of fraud, is not the confession of the criminal defendant, so long as the criminal defendant does not make a confession.