However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 28, 2016, the Defendant stated that “D” in the operation of the Defendant’s Defendant’s “D” located in Young-gun, Young-gun, the Defendant was supplied KRW 18,446,400 for the sum of KRW 18,512 for sugar (15 Kg) on July 28, 2016, to the victim F, who operates E by telephone, “on the face of the delivery of the goods, to pay the goods in cash immediately, and to request the supply of credit or credit cards to the Defendant.”

9. Between 17.1 and 17. A total amount of KRW 91,191,200 was delivered as shown in the list of offenses.

However, the defendant had no intention or ability to pay the price as agreed to receive the goods from the damaged person because he/she immediately resells the goods that he/she received from the damaged person due to the repair of the kimchi factory at the time and uses them in the repayment of the existing debt and the settlement of the commitment bill.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired the total amount of 91,191,200 won from the injured party.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Statement of the customer director and transaction;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (the details used for settlement through promise with funds to be paid to victims in exchange for the payment of goods with regard to the specific amount of damage and the place of use);

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act and Article 347 of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is not forged is an unfavorable circumstance.

Along with the fact that the defendant led to confession and reflect on the crime of this case, the defendant remains liable for 23 million won with a significant repayment up to the present day, and the victim does not want to be punished by the defendant, the victim was unable to pay the goods due to the business fund, and it is difficult to view that the method of crime of this case is inferior. Otherwise, the defendant's age, sexual conduct, and motive for the crime.