Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and 2020 order35, 2020 order3562 of the judgment of the defendant, and 2020 order3485.

Punishment of the crime

On June 14, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 4 months for fraud, etc. in the branch court of the Busan District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 22, 2019.

On July 11, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a special injury, etc. at the Changwon District Court for eight months, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 19, 2019.

Around January 31, 2019, the Defendant posted a false statement stating that “E is accessing the Internet’s main trading site” at the Defendant’s residence located in the Seocho-gu, Changwon-si C building D, Changwon-si, and then selling Aphone7” at the Internet’s main trading site, and said that “on the deposit of the price for the goods, the Defendant would deliver the relevant goods to the Defendant at his/her home.”

However, there was no intention or ability to send the goods even if the defendant receives the price for the goods from the victim because the defendant does not possess the above goods.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 213,00 from the victim’s G account (Account Number: H) in the name of the Defendant around January 31, 2019, and received KRW 213,000 from the victim to February 14, 2019, and acquired KRW 93,000 in total from the victims by the same method five times in total, as shown in the attached crime list 1 from February 14, 2019.

around October 10, 2019, the Defendant: (a) visited K, which is an Internet trading site, at the Defendant’s residence located under the IJ at Yangsan-si; (b) sold a new post by means of “K”; and (c) reported and contacted the content to the victim L, who deposited KRW 460,000,000 into the Republic of Korea.

The phrase “the meaning was false.”

However, in fact, the defendant had no intention or ability to send the goods even if he receives the price for the goods from the victim because he thought that he would sell the goods at the time to other places and repay his obligation.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and belongs to it.