The Defendant is a person who operates a machine in Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government "C" as an industrial chain.

On March 2016, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D at the above C Office stating, “When processing machinery, and paying KRW 70 million in advance, at least 70,000,000 in advance, the Defendant would supply at least 70 tons in monthly powder every three years.”

However, from September 2015, “C” operated by the Defendant had never produced the said scrap metal at all thereafter due to the suspension of business from around September 2015, and not only had a debt amounting to KRW 439 million, but also had no intent or ability to supply the said scrap metal even if the said money was paid to the employees who retired from the said company, such as retirement pay and wages of KRW 50 million.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim, received 70 million won from the victim to the corporate bank account in the name of the Defendant on March 31, 2016, from the victim, and acquired it by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Application of the statutes on account transactions, certificates of transactions, and certificates of measurement;

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. Type 1 (less than KRW 100,00) of the basic area (from June to one year and six months) (a person who has a special sentencing seal) of the basic area of fraud, the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing criteria of the general public; and

2. Whether or not to suspend the execution (main reasons for consideration): Unagreement (general reasons for consideration) - No effort to recover damage shall be made - No positive: There shall be no criminal records of a suspended execution or more.

3. The crime of this case in which a sentence of sentence is to be pronounced is that the Defendant, even though the Defendant had no intent and ability to supply a powder, acquired 70 million won from the damaged person under the name of a cash in advance, and that the nature of the crime is not good in that the damaged amount has not been repaid for a considerable period of time, and the Defendant did not agree with the injured person.