beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant believed that the victims who did not know well the defendant's specific personal status were English teachers of the D High School and that they were economically stable, as the victim B, the victim C and the vehicle club came to know.
1. On November 27, 2016, the Defendant, against the victim B, called the victim’s phone from the front-nam building E and the Defendant’s residence at the Defendant’s home located in the front-nam Si building and the Defendant’s home located in the F, that the Defendant could not withdraw by means of money due to living expenses, etc. Where the benefit passbook is attached. If the Defendant borrowed money, he/she would obtain a director’s house as collateral and repay all of the borrowed money.
However, as seen above, the Defendant was a high school teacher, but the Defendant did not have any special income or property as a temporary English instructor and did not have any real income or property. Therefore, even if the actual benefit passbook was attached or the director was planned, there was no intention or ability to pay the amount normally even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim.
In addition, from around that time to November 28, 2017, the Defendant received a total of KRW 22,250,000 from the victim over 11 times as shown in the annexed Table 1.
Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, received property from the victim.
2. On June 27, 2017, the criminal defendant against the victim C calls the victim at the victim’s residence in the building E at the time of Jeonnam-si and the defendant’s residence in the name of the defendant in F, and falsely stated that “The head of the Tong cannot withdraw by being subject to seizure of the head of the Tong due to the fraud in the Republic of Korea. If he/she lends money to A, he/she would receive the deposit from the head of the Tong and pay it.”
However, as above, the Defendant was a high school teacher, but the Defendant was a temporary English instructor and was in the workplace, and there is a special income.