The defendant is the owner of B multi-household housing at the time of a show.

On March 18, 2015, the Defendant is a three-household tenant among the nine households in the studio-gu 9 households, and the rest six-household tenants are all the monthly tenants.

“Falsely speaking to the effect that there is no problem in the return of deposit,” and concluded a lease contract with the victim for the said housing 303 amounting to 2 years of contract and 55 million won.

However, among the residents of the above housing, the monthly tenants were more than three households, and the previous tenants were to return the deposit to six households, and the total amount of the deposit to be returned was KRW 225 million. The Defendant did not have any intention or ability to return the deposit even if he did not receive the deposit from the damaged party, since he had an excessive obligation than the property owned by the mortgagee, such as KRW 118.5 million, KRW 65 million, KRW 60 million, KRW 4 million, KRW 17.2 million, KRW 17.2 million, KRW 17.2 million, KRW 4 million, and KRW 17.2 million.

Around March 18, 2015, the Defendant received KRW 5,500,000 from the injured party to the Agricultural Cooperative account under the name of the Defendant, and received KRW 49,55 million from April 13, 2015 to receive KRW 5,50,000 in total from the same account.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Complaint;

1. A multi-household lease contract;

1. Confirmation of objects of brokerage and explanatory note;

1. Details of auction;

1. Application of statutes on transaction details and certificates of transaction details;

1. There is no person who has a basic area (from June to January, 199) (except in case of less than KRW 100,00) (except in case of a person who has a special sentencing sentencing) of the basic area (Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the crime in question, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the choice of punishment, the grounds for sentencing of imprisonment [the scope of recommendation]. [Judgment of sentencing] The defendant recognizes the crime of this case, and there is no record of punishment exceeding the same kind and fine, etc.