If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

On July 201, 201, the Defendant stated that “E” store operated by the Defendant within the south-gu “D” store in the south-gu Office of Mapo-si, Mapo-si, Spo-si, and that “The Defendant would accept funerals. When opening the store, the Defendant would be able to receive deposit KRW 10 million at the headquarters of E and KRW 20 million at the interior cost.”

However, at the time, the Defendant did not consult on the above store transfer on the part of the head office or “D”. Since the Defendant was liable for a debt equivalent to KRW 25 million, the Defendant had the intent to receive money from the victim and had no intent or ability to receive the store from the victim.

around August 19, 201, the Defendant received KRW 10 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of the Defendant, KRW 5 million to the same account around September 15, 201, and KRW 5 million to the same account around September 21, 2011.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property from the victim by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. The prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of the accused (including F's statement)

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (Attachment to a trading statement);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. The sentencing conditions under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act shall be determined by taking into consideration the various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing, such as the restoration of damage by approximately KRW 11,40,000,00, out of the amount of damage caused by reason of the sentencing of Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, and the defendant