beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On November 26, 2018, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant received a proposal from a person without the name of the Defendant (one name “B”) that “to withdraw money deposited in the current account and then to offer loans by raising transaction performance by delivering it to the members of the Fund; (b) however, in withdrawing money, the Defendant considered that the Defendant’s money delivered by the Defendant may be the amount of damage caused by the Defendant’s fraud, since the process of lending, such as making a false statement to the bank employees about the purpose of withdrawing money and delivering a large amount of cash to the members of the Fund.”
Nevertheless, on November 30, 2018, when the Defendant, by misrepresenting the investigative agency at an improper place and by receiving 35.6 million won from the victim C to the IBK Bank account (Account Number: D) in the name of the Defendant, the Defendant, according to the direction of the person who was unable to obtain the name, withdrawn the above 35.6 million won out of the total discharge from the IBK Bank to the large discharge from the IBK Bank from the IBK Bank, and then delivered it to the person who was unable to obtain the name.
Accordingly, the Defendant provided information on the Defendant’s account to help the Defendant receive money by deceiving the victim, and aided and abetted the Defendant by withdrawing and conveying the amount of damage deposited into the Defendant’s account with the knowledge of the fact that the Defendant was unaware of the money by deceiving the victim.
2. Determination
A. Since aiding and abetting under the Criminal Act refers to direct and indirect act that facilitates the principal offender’s implementation with the knowledge of the fact that the principal offender is committing the crime, aiding and abetting the principal offender should have the intention to commit so-called aiding and abetting and that the principal offender’s act constitutes an act that constitutes a constituent element.
However, since such intention is an in-depth fact, if the defendant denies it, it is inevitable to prove it by means of proving indirect facts that have considerable relevance with the intention due to the nature of the object, and what is the substantial relation.