beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On February 14, 2017, the Defendant, at the E store near the D Station located in Jungcheon-si, Seoul around 10:0,00, was known to the general public.
The victim G introduced through F made a false statement that “A 300,000,000 won is available to D, and if you have a 8kg of gold in custody by the government, a 300,000,000 won is deducted from the government, and the 300,000,000 won is deducted.”
However, even if the defendant received money from the injured party, he did not have any intention or ability to bring about the amount of 8km stored by the government to the injured party through public officials.
As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received from the victim the sum of KRW 290,00,000 (the check number: H. 100,000,000 in the face of KRW 100,00 in the face of the Bank, KRW 10,00 in the face of the Bank, KRW 10,000 in the face of the Bank, KRW 9 in the face of the check (the check number: J. or K).
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Statement of the police statement related to G;
1. Application of the CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes to receipts, seals, checks, L, M resident registration certificates photographs, photographic photographs of withdrawal slips, copies of checks in front of each person, certificates of fact, certificates of fact, and telephone recording files storage;
1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment, and reasons for sentencing of imprisonment;
1. Application of the sentencing criteria [Scope of the recommended punishment] General Fraud (at least one hundred million won, but less than five hundred million won) basic area (at least one year to four years), and no special sentencing person exists;
2. Consideration, such as the fact that the amount of money obtained by deceptioning a sentence is large, that there is no good quality of the crime, that most of the damage has not been recovered, that there is a history of punishment for the same criminal record, that the defendant is against the confession of the crime in this case, and that the amount of damage seems to have been repaid 20 million won out of the amount of damage.