beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[Criminal Power] On January 28, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Bribery) at the Daegu District Court on the grounds of a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Bribery), and the period of parole on July 29, 201 during the execution of the sentence was expired on August 16, 201.
【Criminal Facts】
The defendant, by abusing the fact that illegal aliens are unable to report to the investigation agency on criminal damage, misrepresenting the police, and resisting illegal aliens in the Republic of Korea to deliver money and valuables under the pretext of crackdown on illegal aliens.
1. On October 31, 2013, the Defendant tried to withdraw money from a deposit account in the name of South Korea living together with the victim in the vicinity of the Daegu-gu Building C at around 17:30 on October 31, 2013, the Defendant stated that, at the house of the victim D, the Defendant opened several entrances and requested the victim to present his/her identification card to the victim by opening the entrance at several times, and that, at the same time, the Defendant did not receive money from the victim because he/she failed to withdraw money because he/she could not withdraw money due to an error in the password, etc.
In the end, the defendant attempted to receive property from the victim by threatening the victim, but did not bring about such intent and did not commit an attempted crime.
2. On November 22, 2013, the Defendant intended to receive money from the victim, stating that “police is the police, and illegal aliens have taken control over the victim,” but the Defendant did not receive money from the victim, on the part of the victim’s house of his/her nationality in Bangladesh-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu around 18:00, the Defendant opened the entrance and opened the entrance at several times, and displayed the locks that he/she had been in possession of the victim in advance.” However, the Defendant did not intend to receive money from the victim because he/she did not know of the Defendant’s horse.