The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant, upon receiving a proposal from the name and influence of the name and influence of the single-scing fraud group to withdraw funds deposited in the Defendant’s account from the name and influence of the organization of the single-sing fraud group and to offer 2% of the withdrawn amount as commission. On December 15, 2015, the Defendant, who was influent with the name of the Defendant, had the victim C by phoneing to the investigation agency at a place where the location cannot be known at around 10:20 on December 15, 2015

In order to create a virtual account and to transfer money to such place.

On the same day, in order to assist the defrauded by receiving KRW 6 million from the damaged person to the National Bank Account (F) account in the name of E, and KRW 17.7 million to the Agricultural Bank Account (G) account in the name of the Defendant, the third party in the name of the Defendant was aided by withdrawing in cash the total amount of KRW 17.5 million out of the money acquired through the above Agricultural Bank Account in the name of the Defendant at the point of Bocheon-dong, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, Seoul, at around December 15, 2015, at the point of Bocheon-gu, Seoul, the third party in the name of the Defendant was aided by facilitating the commission of the crime.

2. The act of aiding and abetting under the Criminal Act refers to direct and indirect acts that facilitate the commission of a principal offender with the knowledge that the principal offender is committing a crime. As such, the so-called aiding and abetting the commission of a principal offender and the principal offender’s intent to commit an act that constitutes the element of the principal offender is required. In the case of aiding and abetting, the principal offender’s intention does not require to be aware of the details of the crime realized by the principal offender, but it is sufficient to doluence or prediction.

However, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the existence of intention, and the conviction leads to the conviction that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt by the judge.