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

On October 10, 2018, the Defendant made a false call to the victim B at an addressless place and made a public auction to the apartment owned by the creditor C. The Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “A would cancel C’s right to collateral security and pay 100,000,000 won per month the principal and interest of the apartment, including loan funds, if the Defendant lent 35,00,000 won to C, and would cancel C’s right to collateral security and set up the right to collateral security on the apartment.”

However, at the time of fact, in order to cancel C’s right to collateral security, the Defendant had to pay C the total amount of KRW 42 million with the loan and interest, and in addition, D was urged to pay D the debt amount of KRW 25 million and KRW 140 million with the debt amount of KRW 100 million with the debt amount of KRW 25 million E, so the victim did not have the intent or ability to set up the right to collateral security for apartment after cancelling C’s right to collateral security with the quasi loan amount, and there was no intention or ability to pay the principal and interest promised to the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 35 million in total from the victim’s house in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, under the name of the victim’s loan in front of the victim’s house in the same day, issued KRW 5 million cashier’s checks at KRW 5 million and KRW 10 million.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol protocol law to B

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 on the suspension of execution (including the penance, the fact that there is an agreement with the victim, and the first offense);