A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Punishment of the crime
On November 19, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Busan District Court, and appealed and appealed all, but the judgment became final and conclusive on August 19, 2015.
On April 2013, the Defendant was found to obtain a loan equivalent to KRW 100 million from a police officer, and the Defendant became aware of C, a loan broker, through his nameless loan broker, and became aware of the victim D, which had been accompanied by C in the process of meeting for C and loan problems.
On May 25, 2013, in the vicinity of the 'E' restaurant located in Ansan-si on May 25, 2013, the Defendant: (a) delayed the loan; (b) made a false statement to the effect that the Defendant “E” in the absence of the above C requires KRW 20 million to the victim; (c) if the Defendant lent KRW 20 million to the victim, he/she would have to fully repaid it 15 days after the loan.”
However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any particular income, and there was a considerable amount of KRW 20 million for personal debts at the time, and even if he borrowed money from the victim due to a situation where it is difficult to lend money by a normal means, he did not have the ability to repay it 15 days later, and the Defendant was well aware of such circumstances.
Around May 30, 2013, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 10 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of the Defendant and acquired it by deceiving the victim.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. The police statement of the victim;
1. Details of account transactions;
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal records, investigation reports, court rulings (No. 22, 23) and application of Acts and subordinate statutes;
1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime (the point of fraud and the choice of imprisonment);
1. A sentence shall be imposed in consideration of the fact that the accused, having the same record as the reasons for sentencing in the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act, repeats the fraudulent act again and has not yet been recovered from damage;
It shall take into account the equality, etc. in cases where judgment is to be rendered concurrently with the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive, and other criminal laws.