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 November 2008, the Defendant is the chief director of a school juristic person E (hereinafter “E driving school”) that operates D high school with his father in the coffee shop in which it is impossible to know the trade name in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju.

For employment, 30,000 won will be employed as a staff member of the D High School Administration Office.

The father's school is the school of father immediately.

A false statement was made to the purport that the school’s main names are “Mad.”.

However, in fact, the Defendant only worked as a director of EA for about one year and six months from around 2003 to June 2004, and on January 18, 2007, the Defendant’s father died on February 15, 2007, and the Defendant was unable to exercise his influence over the employment of employees. Therefore, even if the Defendant received money from the injured party, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to have the victimized party employed as an employee of D High School as an employee of D High School, and did not have any other income or property, so there was no intention or ability to return the money to the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received a copy of the check from the victim himself/herself on November 2, 2008 and a copy of the check on February 17, 2009 and acquired 30 million won in total from the victim himself/herself.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. A report on investigation (teleline investigation) and a report on investigation (F currency);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each loan certificate and a copy of a request for issuance of check before oneself;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [the scope of recommended punishment] In the area of mitigation (one month to one year) (one year), in the area of mitigation (the person who is specially mitigated) [the person who is not subject to punishment], or in the case of restitution of considerable damage (the decision of sentence], there is no criminal conviction exceeding the same kind and fine for the defendant, and the victim is the victim.