Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On May 16, 2018, the Defendant posted a letter on the Internet B stating that he/she sells fishing goods, and reported it to the victim C who contacted with the Defendant, thereby making a false statement to the effect that “if he/she transfers the price of goods to the account, he/she will send the fishing goods to the account.”

However, in fact, the above victim tried to use fishing goods for living expenses, etc. by receiving the price for fishing goods from the above victim, but did not have the intent or ability to sell the fishing goods to the above victim.

Around May 16, 2018, the Defendant deceptioned the above victim, and received KRW 123,500 from the said victim the transfer of KRW 1,171,500 to the account (Account Number D) in the name of the Defendant in the name of the said victim as above, and received the total amount of KRW 1,500 from the victims nine times in total as shown in the attached crime list.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;

1. Each statement in E, F, C, G, H, I, J, K, and L Preparation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on account transfer, document to close a letter, document to close a deposit, document to close a conversation, document to close a conversation, statement of transactions, statement of transfer, certificate of transfer, evidential data to close a screen, and a report on investigation (report on revision of the date of crime H of a victim);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant recognized a mistake and reflects the defendant's wrongness. However, even though the defendant had been punished twice as a fine for the same crime, the crime of this case was committed, damage was not completely recovered, and the crime of fraud of used goods on the Internet like this case is committed against unspecified and multiple persons, and needs to be punished strictly considering social harm, such as transaction safety and trust.