Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months and by imprisonment for six months.

However, as to Defendant A, this shall not apply.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A On January 10, 2019, the Seoul Western District Court sentenced a two-year grace period to six months of imprisonment for fraud, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 18, 2019.

1. Defendant A’s fraud

A. A. Around May 2016, the Defendant, as a branch of the Victim C and D C, made a false statement to the effect that “If the Defendant subscribed to a number system and paid KRW 1100,000 per month, he/she would pay the fraternity to C at the last 24 payment date, which is the 1.1 million order,” to the effect that the Defendant transferred the right to the fraternity paid as a branch of the Victim C and D C, around December 2016.”

However, in fact, at the time of organizing the above fraternity, the defendant given a senior number to the debtor at the time of his organization, and appropriated it for the repayment of the defendant's credit, and let the above debtor pay the fraternity monthly payment. However, since the above debtor was in a situation where it is difficult for the debtor to pay the fraternity monthly payment due to lack of financial resources, there was no intention or ability to pay the fraternity to the victim on the agreed date even if he received the fraternity payment from the

As above, the Defendant belongs to the victim and belongs to the victim, from May 13, 2016 to September 11, 2017, the list of crimes committed in annexed Form from around September 13, 2016 to the victim.

1. As described, 17 times in total received KRW 18,700,000 as a deposit money and acquired it by deceit.

B. On September 2017, the Defendant issued to the Victim C, “The guidance was broken around January 2017,” to the Victim C, which was invested in B but did not receive a return of the investment money. In order to receive a return of the said money, the Defendant sent money in addition to the need for further money.”

However, the Defendant did not have invested in B, and the Defendant did not have the intent and ability to repay the money borrowed from the Defendant due to excess of the obligation. Therefore, even if the Defendant received the money from the victim, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the money received, and the money received newly.

The Defendant is as above.