A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 22, 2017, a member in charge of telephone financing fraud shall call a victim C to the public prosecutor's office, and misrepresent a false person to the public prosecutor's office investigator.

“On the same day after the end of the report, the injured party transferred KRW 6.9 million to the account (D) in the name of Defendant (A).

On December 18, 2017, the Defendant sent money to the designated person by us by way of the Kakao Stockholm message, etc., from an employee of the above-mentioned telephone financial fraud assistance company (“the Defendant”) around December 18, 2017, the Defendant informed of the account number because he would make a loan by creating transaction details.

“A copy of the Defendant’s resident registration certificate shall be sent to the Defendant, after hearing the horses and accepting it.”

And the account number was known.

However, on July 7, 2011, the Defendant transferred his/her name to an unspecified person that he/she would lend his/her physical card, etc. to the Kimhae Police Station, and was investigated as a case in which the account under the name of the Defendant was used for a telephone financing fraud. On June 13, 2013, the Defendant was investigated as a case in which the account was used for a telephone financing fraud; on July 4, 2013; on July 11, 2013; and on August 16, 2013, he/she transferred his/her resident registration card, seal impression, etc. from each shipping police station to an unspecified person to obtain a loan; on November 30, 2016, the account opened in the name of the Defendant was transferred to the Defendant under the name of the Defendant to a third person to be used for the online goods fraud; and on November 30, 2016, the Defendant did not obtain a loan from the Defendant 2, an account holder, who was not in the name of the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is not an employee of the lending company.