A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

1. On November 15, 2018, the Defendant filed an application for a credit counseling by telephone, and then received a request for a credit account from “B” under the name in which the Defendant was contacted (hereinafter “Singing”) to “B, which is an organization of the telephone financial fraud (hereinafter “Singing”). The credit rating is difficult at present. The Defendant’s credit shall be high by making a deposit and withdrawal from the current account. Upon receiving a proposal, “C”, the Defendant did not check whether the said “C” is a normal lending business entity, and did not check whether the lending business entity is a normal lending business entity, and did not check whether the said “B” was an employee, and it was investigated before being investigated as a suspicion of aiding and abetting the Defendant to commit the singing fraud, and thus demanding a credit account transfer from “B” to the Defendant’s account by recognizing that the Defendant’s account was a typical licensing crime, and notified the Defendant’s name and account number of the Defendant’s funds that were remitted to the Defendant’s account, but could have known the Defendant’s name and accepted that the Defendant’s account was necessary.

On November 16, 2018, when a victim E calls at a non-place on the name of November 11:44, 2018, and falsely concluding that the Seoul Regional Police Agency’s cyber investigation team investigator was aware of a criminal who made the card, and that there was any fact to assert that the person was to make the card. However, whether there was a fact that the person made the card without charge or not. Since the criminal could make a deduction of the money in the passbook, he/she must make a transfer of money in the passbook.”

However, there was no intention or ability to keep the deposit even if it is transferred from the victim because the person who has misrepresented the police officer, was willing to transfer the deposit in the account in the name of the victim from the victim to the above D bank account in the name of the defendant.

Nevertheless, the person who has been unaware of name is above.