The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. On November 28, 2016, the Defendant stated in the facts charged that “A victim E, the mother of the city, through D, is the mother of the city in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government’s house located in Eunpyeong-gu through D, stating that “The Defendant, as the husband’s corporate circumstance is not good, put 200 million won deposited at each point as it does not have any money to be included in the calculation of tax base and to lend KRW 70 million as it does not have any money.”

However, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged party, it was thought that it would be used to pay the husband’s deposits, not to use it as the husband’s company’s deposits, but to pay the debt to the lending company or the credit card payment, etc. In addition to the above debt, the Defendant was obligated to pay a large amount of debt to the Korea Investment Savings Bank, etc., and thus, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability

On November 29, 2016, the Defendant received KRW 70 million from the injured party to his own new bank account.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. Article 328(1) of the former Criminal Act provides that the crimes provided for in Article 323 between a lineal blood relative, spouse, relative living together, relative living together, family member living together or his/her spouse shall be exempted from punishment;

Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that "When a person commits an offense under Article 323 among relatives other than those under paragraph (1), he/she may institute a public prosecution only upon complaint.

“.......”

The facts charged of this case are crimes falling under Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 328(2) of the Criminal Act, which are applicable mutatis mutandis by Article 354 of the Criminal Act, also the same as relatives.

However, according to the indictment and the record of this case, the defendant's husband, the defendant's husband, and the defendant are legally related relatives (see Article 777 of the Civil Act) as relatives within the fourth degree of marriage with the victim, the defendant and the victim did not live together. On February 28, 2018, after the indictment of this case was instituted, a letter of revocation of complaint stating that the injured person does not want punishment against the defendant is submitted.