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

On August 9, 2019, the Defendant visited D, located in Seocheon-si B, and acted as if Nonparty D were to purchase the EMW vehicle at KRW 45 million, and on the other hand, concluded that the Defendant sold the said vehicle to the Victim F as he/she was the owner of the vehicle.

In fact, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to purchase the said vehicle or sell the vehicle to the victim, in the car page called “H” of the G, because the Defendant had been willing to collect the vehicle price between Nonparty D and the victim, the borrower.

On August 9, 2019, the Defendant deceiving the victim as above and caused the victim to remit 38.5 million won to the account of a new bank (I) in the name of Nonparty D on August 9, 2019. Since it is impossible to trade the amount deposited more than the amount promised from Nonparty D, the Defendant again received a refund of the money transferred by the victim to the Defendant’s agricultural bank (J) account under the method to return it to the Defendant’s agricultural bank (J) account.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police interrogation protocol F of the accused in relation to the defendant's legal statement, each police statement F of the police statement document F of the defendant - copy of the certificate of personal seal impression - request for provision of communication data, and comprehensive investigation report of the vehicle's comprehensive commercial income tax for the correspondence data meeting (the complainant's assertion and suspect's statement

1. The crime of this case, where the pertinent provision on criminal facts, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act on the selection of punishment (Fraud), and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act on the selection of a fine, is deemed to have obtained by deceiving KRW 38.5 million from the victim with high-priced external motor vehicle trading, and such crime is not good in light of the methods, circumstances, and results of the crime.

However, the defendant has led to the confession of all of the crimes of this case, and is against the defendant, and the defendant fully pays 38.5 million won to the victim and agree with the victim.