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

An application for compensation by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is operating a mutual warning point of “E” on the first floor of the Seo-gu Incheon Building D (hereinafter referred to as “E”).

"2017 Gohap 392"

1. Fraud;

A. On August 21, 2015, the criminal defendant against the victim F was found to have raised profits from trading the victim F with the victim F.

여윳돈이 있으면 나한테 투자를 해라.

It is expected that there will be a lot of profits from investment in the second and second trading of the money.

“The purport was to the effect that “.....”

However, at the time, the Defendant was only required to use money as a gold in the Internet gambling. At the time, several persons, loan companies, etc. were liable to pay a large amount of money, and even if the Defendant did not receive money from the damaged party due to the absence of a friendly relationship with which profit was raised due to the second and second transactions, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the principal and profit by investing the money from the second and second transactions.

Nevertheless, as seen above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) obtained KRW 3 million from the victim to the community credit cooperative account (G) in the name of the Defendant on the same day from the victim; and (c) acquired it by defrauding it; and (b) obtained a total of KRW 653,450,400 through 63 times from around that time to October 1, 2016, as shown in attached Table 1.

B. On July 29, 2016, the Defendant against the victim H ought to pay the remainder of the house to the victim H, who had a close relationship with E due to a usual trading relationship, “A director must leave the house that is currently residing at the time when he/she must go to go to the company, and should be paid first.

The purport was that the remainder shall be repaid in accordance with the entry of the remainder, and that the remainder shall be leased KRW 30 million.

However, the Defendant had already been absent from the Internet gambling at the time, and had a large amount of liability as described in the foregoing paragraph. The Defendant had no intention or ability to repay the obligation even if he borrowed KRW 30 million from the injured party because he had been urged to repay the obligation from the creditors.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above.