A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

Criminal facts

On August 7, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution for fraud at the Seoul Southern District Court, and the judgment was finalized on May 14, 2015.

On February 13, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 10:0 on February 13, 2014, at the c’C’s coffee shop located in Yongsan-si District B, “A” to the victim D would be bound unless the freezing door operated by the Defendant was set aside and the Defendant received the case to the police as the day on which the person was multi-child.

14) The purport was to “a loan only ten (10) days after an investigation is conducted at the 14th time.”

However, in fact, the freezing warehouse operated by the defendant was transferred to another person through an auction in 2010, and there was no case that a person was received in the freezing warehouse operated by the defendant, and even if the defendant borrowed money from the damaged person due to the lack of property or income, there was no intention or ability to pay it properly within 10 days.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received a total of KRW 30 million from the victim by deceiving the victim, and received KRW 15 million from the victim on February 13, 2014, and KRW 15 million on February 20, 2014, such as receiving KRW 30 million from the victim on the pretext of each loan.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement concerning the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant by the prosecution;

1. Some statements made against the defendant during the police interrogation protocol;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Previous conviction: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of inquiry about criminal history;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code to treat concurrent crimes: (a) the reason for sentencing under Article 39(1) requires consideration of the degree of damage caused by the instant crime, whether the Defendant has recovered from damage, and the case of being tried together with the first head of the judgment that became final and conclusive; and (b) the Defendant has not yet become final and conclusive, but is another case (crime).