The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

Punishment of the crime

On June 26, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and three years and six months for the attempted robbery, etc. by the Seoul Central District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 24, 2015.

On December 4, 2014, the Defendant prepared an application for purchase with the purport that “A person engaged in health functional foods, which constitutes a city of 396,000, will purchase at a ten-month rate” at D underground stores located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and issued a written application for purchase to G, a business operator of F operated by the victim E, and made a pre-payment of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the pre-payment.”

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay for the amount of the timely installment even if he purchased a baby, because he had no income or property at the time.

The Defendant deceptioned the victim through G, and then acquired the 396,000 Abrym 2 from the victim who was affiliated with G around that time after he obtained the 396,000 Abrym 2 from the victim on his own.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. Complaint;

1. Records of the judgment: Application of each of the statutes of the judgment attached to a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and a criminal investigation report (Attachment to the judgment of the case related to the defendant);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. The latter part of Article 39 (1) of the Exemption Criminal Act (excluding punishment against the accused in consideration of the equity in cases where the judgment was received simultaneously with the attempts to obtain the judgment, etc., while the amount of the fraud of this case is not large, the intention of the accused is also nothing more than the dolusible intention, the intention of the defraudation of the accused is also about