Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
"2013 Highest 4880"
1. On October 25, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Busan District Court. On January 10, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for the same crime at the same court, and each appeal was filed on March 21, 2013, and was filed by the same court for eight months and sentenced to imprisonment for the same time on March 21, 2013. On April 11, 2013, the Defendant was 23 persons of the same kind, including the termination of the enforcement of the sentence.
On April 24, 2013, at the Internet “C” website around 09:00, the Defendant posted a false letter “pop-up of a gallon 2 pop-up cell phone” on the Internet site, and made a false statement to “to send a cell phone after confirmation of remittance” to the victim D who contacted with it.
However, even if the victim has remitted the price, the defendant did not have the ability to send the thing.
As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 190,000 won from the victim to the corporate bank account (E) under the name of the accused at around that time.
B. On May 7, 2013, at around 21:00, the Defendant posted a false statement to the Internet NAF “F”, and subsequently sent a false statement to the victim G who reported and contacted the false statement to the effect that “I will immediately send the remittance to the first place.”
However, even if the victim has remitted the price, the defendant did not have the ability to send the thing.
At around 10:00 the following day by deceiving the victim, the defendant received 230,000 won from the victim to the account under the preceding paragraph as a price.
C. On May 7, 2013, the Defendant posted a false statement to the “F” camera on May 7, 2013, stating that “The Defendant would sell a well-known store to 500,000 won.” The Defendant reported the false statement to the victim H who contacted with the Defendant, stating that “The Defendant would send a door to a door-to-door return if the remittance was made.”
However, even if the victim has remitted the price, the defendant did not have the ability to send the thing.
The Defendant is identical to this.