[2014 Highest 460] The defendant is a person who operates a building company of the trade name C, and has maintained a friendly relationship with D's family while teaching with D.

1. A housing construction fraud;

A. On March 11, 2014, at around 09:00 on March 11, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement, stating that “The Defendant would be able to get back the Victim’s house as if the Defendant would newly put the Victim’s house, and the material cost would vary.”

However, the defendant did not have any intention and ability to keep the victim's house new.

The Defendant received KRW 500,000 from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of the Defendant in the name of material cost, and received KRW 3 million in cash on March 11, 2014, and KRW 1.5 million in cash on March 17, 2014, respectively.

B. At around 14:00 on March 24, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim’s H H’s wife, who is his/her father in Ansan-si G, that he/she would remove the victim’s mother-friendly F’s house without the victim’s intent and ability to newly set up his/her house, such as the above paragraph 1(a). The Defendant received four million won in cash from the victim on his/her job as material expenses.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victims, thereby obtaining a total of nine million won from the victims.

2. Around 13:00 on March 27, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim H stating that “The Defendant was employed as a public official of Ansan-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong.”

However, the facts are that the defendant did not have a public official who was aware of the viewing, and there was no intention and ability to employ the victim's children as a public official for safe viewing.

The defendant is in the position of the victim as a necessary fund from the victim.