A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

The seized 50,000 Won 88(No. 1) and the Trwegian smartphone .

Punishment of the crime

[Judgment of the court below] The non-indicted B is a member of the telephone financial fraud (hereinafter referred to as "one-person") organization that captures a family member against an unspecified number of victims and uses it as a hostage, or who solicits, manages, and instructs to commit a crime, cash collection and delivery policies that receive money from a deceiving victim.

On March 15, 2020, the Defendant: (a) entered the Republic of Korea from Malaysia to Malaysia; (b) directly received damage money from the victim of the telephone financial fraud crime in accordance with the direction of the above-mentioned person; (c) performed the duty of collecting and delivering cash to the telephone financial fraud assistance staff; and (d) conspired with the above-mentioned person to receive the payment of KRW 100,000 to KRW 20,000 per case of the crime.

【Criminal Facts】

[200 Highest 153]

1. On April 17, 2020, the telephone financial fraud assistance staff called the victim C by phoneing the victim C at a place that is not in the name of the attempted fraud, and, in order with the victim, the victim gave a guarantee in cash. Since he/she borrowed money from his/her father and wife did not repay the money, he/she went away without paying the money, he/she is leaving his/her guardian, who is the guarantor. The 55 million won must be repaid, and he/she shall be relieved of his/her father and wife with the money that he/she could have withdrawn."

However, in fact, the telephone financial fraud assistance staff, including the defendant, did not capture the victim's wife.

On April 17, 2020, the Defendant sought to receive KRW 20 million, which was the victim or the victim had to withdraw from D, on the spot, at the Choyang-dong community service center located in 13, Choyang-dong, Sin-si, Sin-si, 15:50 on April 17, 2020. However, upon receiving the victim’s report, the Defendant failed to receive the said notification from the police officer arrested on the spot.

In this respect.