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

Punishment of the crime

On March 13, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 21, 2019.

Around June 5, 2018, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would normally pay the principal and interest of KRW 13.2 million each month to D for the loan employee D, who is in charge of loaned KRW 13.2 million.” The Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would normally pay the principal and interest of KRW 246,087 each month for 60 months.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any occupation, unlike the written application for new installment loan, and did not have any obligation equivalent to KRW 24.6 million at financial institutions without any special property, and had no intention or ability to repay the loan even if the Defendant received the loan from the victim because it was planned to use the vehicle as debt repayment and living expenses after the purchase of the vehicle and the repurchase of the vehicle after the purchase of the vehicle.

The Defendant immediately requested the victim E Co., Ltd. to approve the loan of KRW 13.2 million, and the victim requested C Co., Ltd. to pay the loan with the FTluri vehicle purchase fund.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired financial benefits by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. G statements;

1. Investigation report (application of financial account trend, search, seizure, verification warrant, and reply);

1. A new installment agreement and a detailed statement of transactions;

1. Previous records before ruling: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports and investigation reports (the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the concurrent crimes)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The sentencing of the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act does not result in the recovery of damage caused by concurrent crimes, the recognition and reflection of the instant crime, and the equity with the case where the judgment was rendered at the same time as the final and conclusive crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.