beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. On April 6, 2012, the Defendant entered Nos. 1 through 10 in the annexed Table Nos. 1 through 10, said, “D,” which is the main point of Defendant’s operation, called “D,” which is the main point of the Defendant’s operation, calls the victim E to obtain “D,” and thus, it is necessary to complete payment. If the Defendant borrowed money without cash, he/she would make a payment later.”
However, the Defendant, without any particular property at the time, was liable to pay approximately KRW 30 million to KRW 40 million to KRW 40 million to KRW 30 million to KRW 3 million to KRW 40 million to KRW 3 million to the monthly salary of the above “D” staff. In addition, while operating the above “D”, the Defendant had no choice but to continuously borrow the above “D” interest and the monthly salary, due to the operation of the said “D” with no prior experience in operating the main office, and thus, the Defendant was unable to pay the above interest and the monthly salary, even if he/she borrowed money from the victim, he/she did not have any intent or ability to pay it.
As above, from April 6, 2012 to August 7, 2012, the Defendant, as indicated in the No. 1 through No. 10 of the List of Offenses from around April 6, 2012 to around August 7, 2012, took over KRW 2,854,00,00 in total from 10 times to 10 times, by means of money transfer from the Agricultural Cooperative (F:) under the name of the Defendant and the Agricultural Cooperative under the name of the Defendant’s father.
2. Frauds listed in [Attachment 1] 11 and 12;
A. On April 2, 2012, the Defendant stated that “D’s monthly salary is below D’s employee E at a non-permanent location below Si-si on April 2, 2012. As there exists a method to reduce monthly salary by credit card, a credit card loan is different, and the payment will be deposited on the settlement date.”
However, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the amount equivalent to the price to the victim even if he uses the credit card of the victim because of the situation described in Paragraph 1.
The Defendant is as above.