beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment for four months, respectively.
However, the period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
“200 Highest 2610”
1. On October 4, 2019, Defendant A made a false statement to the effect that Defendant A would use the mobile phone device value for the end of October 4, 2019 by opening the mobile phone under the four names, and by selling it as an agreed fee for the use of the mobile phone device value for the next time.
However, in fact, Defendant A did not have been investigated in the case of assault, and therefore did not need to receive money from the injured party to use it as a living cost. At that time, Defendant A’s credit rating of Defendant A was 8 to 9, and there was no particular income, and Defendant A did not have any intention or ability to use a mobile phone as an agreed gold, and later did not have any intent or ability to pay the mobile phone value.
Defendant
A, as such, by deceiving the victim and allowing the victim to open a gallon 10 cellular phone in the name of the victim in the “G” located in the “G” located in the “G” in the Silung-si on the same day, A had the victim open a gallon 10 cell phone, and received the above cell phone from the victim at the same place.
As a result, Defendant A was provided property equivalent to KRW 1,397,00 by deceiving the victim.
2. On October 10, 2019, Defendant A called the victim E by telephone at a place where it is impossible to identify the warning place on October 10, 2019, and “after selling it in four names, Defendant A made a false statement to the victim E that “after the opening of two mobile phones in four names, Defendant A would pay the value of 10 mobile phones in jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum, and pay the value of two mobile phones jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum jum
However, even if Defendant A received two additional mobile phones from the injured party, he thought that the above mobile phone was used as personal living expenses, etc., and at the time Defendant A’s credit rating was 8 to 9,000 won for the lending company, etc.