However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Part of the facts charged is revised to the extent that it does not materially disadvantage the defendant's defense right.

On March 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B by phone call to the victim B at a place where it is impossible to know the specific place below Busan, and “I would immediately make payment after 2-3 hours after receiving the payment if I would supply the destroyed goods for export to China.”

However, at the time, the defendant did not intend to pay the price to the victim even if he was supplied with the destruction by the victim.

According to the aforementioned legal statement and investigation records of C Witness C and B, each of which the victim was contacted by deceiving the victim as above, C shall be deemed to have concluded a sales contract for the extinction with B. Therefore, C shall not be deemed to have been a direct victim of the criminal act in its holding beyond the fact that C actually suffered loss due to the criminal act in its holding.

On March 29, 2017, there was a delivery of a 120,120,000 won of the market price in E located in Busan Seo-gu.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C and B;

1. A name box and a supply contract;

1. Each contract for the supply of goods, a written request for F payment, a copy of the passbook, a certificate of storage, a written request for wage, and a name box;

1. Details of text of the mobile phone;

1. Reference materials, including written statements;

1. G letters, etc.;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing recording records;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( considered as favorable circumstances, etc. among the reasons for sentencing following the suspended sentence);

1. Determination of the defendant and defense counsel's assertion under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order

1. The injured party B was unable to supply tts to the defendant according to the contract concluded with the defendant, but the 63,403. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 1820, Apr. 403>