A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 27, 2016, the Defendant posted a false article to the effect that “I will sell a medium TV” at the Internet HH market and then reported it to the effect that “I will first send the said article to the victim B who contacted with the Defendant.”

However, at the time, there was no intention or ability to send money even if the defendant did not possess the above objects and received money from the injured party.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and transferred KRW 180,000 to the bank account with the name of the defendant on the same day from the victim.

In addition, from September 22, 2016 to October 25 of the same year, the Defendant received a total of KRW 2,550,000 from 10 on 11 occasions by the same method as follows.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement and written petition of C, D, E, B, F, G, H, I, J, and K;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing financial transactions in question, details of account transfer, details of each Kakao Stockholm conversation, details of transfer verification, detailed statement of account transfer for Internet banking transfer, results of transfer management by bank account, transaction statement, details of transfer, confirmation of transaction results, details of transaction, each notice, the contents of each posted and Kakao Stockholm conversation, and certificates of deposit transaction records;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is not suitable in consideration of the following: (a) the Defendant, as seen above, sold goods to ten victims on the Internet; and (b) fraudulently acquired 2,550,000 won in total by deceiving them; and (c) the recovery of damage is not proper.

However, the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, there is no criminal conviction or more than the suspension of execution, the fact that the victim B, E, C, and K has repaid the damage, and the age of the defendant.