However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who operates "C" as a company that engages in the operation of a fishing operation, etc., and the victim D concluded a supply contract with the defendant on behalf of the victim F in lieu of the victim F who is the representative of "E" that is a company that engages in the export and import of fishery products.

1. On May 13, 2017, the Defendant committed the crime against the victim D at the “H” office located in Ansan-si Group G in Ansan-si, an Ansan-si, stating, “A civilian-led victim D who visited him to conclude a supply contract with respect to the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation of the operation

However, the Defendant had the intention to use the money received from the victim individually from the beginning, so even if he received the money, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to supply the victim “a person who is a civilian”.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and was transferred to the Suhyup Bank account (I) in the name of the defendant as the down payment around May 16, 2017 from the damaged person.

2. On June 2017, the Defendant committed the crime against the Victim F, at the “C” office located in Ansan-si Office G, Ansan-si, a member G, stating, “A person who is requested under the “a contract for lighting supply” refers to the victim F, who is a person who is requested by the victim F, “A person has been able to collect lighting prior to the scheduled date and time.”

However, in fact, the Defendant had the intention to use the money received from the injured person individually, so even if he received the money from the injured person, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to supply the “nickly” to the injured person.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and received 2 million won in cash as activity expenses for the same day from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1.With respect to D and J, respectively.