beta
Text
Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.
In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. Defendants’ criminal conduct
A. On May 30, 2017, around May 30, 2017, the Defendants made a false statement to the victim D, stating that “Around May 30, 2017, the Defendant would pay the card price to the victim of the apartment in front of the apartment to be placed in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seocho-gu 10-ro 10, and Seocho-gu 4, the apartment to be placed in front of the Defendant’s Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul, may make it difficult for the Defendants to pay the card price to the future.”
However, the Defendants had no intention or ability to pay the above money normally even if they borrowed the money.
Ultimately, on May 30, 2017, the Defendants deceiving the victim as above, and acquired the money from the victim to the national bank account in the name of Defendant A by remittance of KRW 10 million.
B. On June 14, 2017, around June 14, 2017, the Defendants made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendants will pay back money to the apartment victim D, who is in front of the apartment that would be able to run in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 2-ro 10, and Seocho-gu, 4.”
However, the Defendants had no intention or ability to pay the above money normally even if they borrowed the money.
After all, the Defendants: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; and (b) obtained money from the victim to the Saemaul Treasury account in the name of E around June 14, 2017; and (c) obtained money from the Defendant’s national bank account in the name of the Defendant A to transfer KRW 10 million.
2. Defendant B: (a) around July 28, 2017, at the “G” coffee shop located in the Seoul Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul; (b) decided that the victim D would receive a large amount of investment money from the company “(ju) H.
It is possible to pay the unpaid money in the past.
The phrase “a loan of KRW 3 million is changed due to living expenses, etc.” was false.
However, it is unclear whether the Defendant was liable for a large number of obligations to the lending company at the time, and whether the Defendant is able to receive the investment money at H.