Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On May 29, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud in the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch, and two years of suspended execution, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 6, 2019.

【Criminal Facts】

The Defendant, around October 28, 2018, even if he received money from another person, did not have the intent or ability to send the goods, but if the Defendant reported a letter posted in B C carpet stating that “The sales of an L&C coin” is “the sales of the food,” and remitted KRW 50,000 to D, he will send the food as a door-to-door.

“Falsely speaking, the victim received KRW 50,000 from the victim in his/her E account (F) from him/her, and from that time, he/she received KRW 250,000 in total three times from the victims from November 2, 2018, as shown in the attached crime list, from November 2, 2018.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of D, G and H;

1. Written confirmation of the results of transfer, details of transmission and receipt of each text message, and review of the results of transfer;

1. Previous convictions: The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, written judgments and references to case agreements;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the same Act concerning the applicable criminal facts, the selection of fines;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order reflects the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and made a mistake, the victim D and G agreed, the amount of damage is not significant. The crime of this case is in the relation of the crime of fraud with the concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the judgment that became final and conclusive, and thus the equity should be considered in the case of judgment at the same time.