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.

1. The Defendant, “2013 Height 6279,” reported that a person engaged in daily work, and the victim C engaged in the business of purchasing scrap metal, placed an advertisement to purchase scrap metal on the “Fish Luxembourg market,” which is a living information site, and had the victim take the means of deceiving the down payment by deceiving the victim to buy the scrap metal.

Therefore, on August 23, 2013, the defendant, at the defendant's house located in Pyeongtaek-si D, was called by the above victim and sold it if he wishes to purchase the building materials which were removed from Pyeongtaek-si E by leaving the phone.

On August 24, 2013, "I make a false statement to the effect that I would like to use it, I would like to display architectural materials stored in the victim's location, and I would like to have the right to dispose of the materials, and I would like to sell the materials to the victim at the victim's office located in Suwon-si F in Suwon-si Line F on the same day. I prepared a contract with the victim that I would sell the materials to the victim.

However, the above building material is owned by G and the defendant did not have the right to dispose of it, and the defendant did not have the intent or ability to sell the above building material to the victim because there is no relationship with G, the owner of the building.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 3,970,300 from the victim, as the down payment around August 24, 2013, from the victim, by remitting KRW 3,970,30 to the new cooperation account (Account Number:H) in the name of the Defendant.

2. On November 10, 2012, the Defendant stated “L” in the bill of indictment on the victim KK at the site where the building materials owned by the J in Pyeongtaek-si located in Pyeongtaek-si on November 10, 2012. However, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, even if it is obvious that it is a clerical error and it is corrected without any amendment to a bill of indictment, it is not likely to substantially obstruct the Defendant’s exercise of the right to defense. Accordingly, the Defendant’s correction ex officio is ex officio.

of 60 tons of scrap metal in this place shall be 1kg.