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

On June 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E at the Da Real Estate Office located in Gyeonggi-gun C, stating that “The Defendant will execute a package work of KRW 25 million with access road 200 meters in Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do, from July 30, 2014.”

However, even if the defendant receives the money from the victim as the price for the construction, he did not have the intention or ability to perform the packing work.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, and deceiving it from the victim on June 10, 2014, up to three million won with the credit union account in the G name, around June 10, 2014, and two million won with the same account around the 27th day of the same month; and

7. Around 21.20 million won was remitted to the same account, and the sum of KRW 25 million was obtained through a total of three occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and H;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Details of transactions and details of each account transaction;

1. Written confirmation, written consent to land use, etc.;

1. In an investigation report (to telephone conversation statement: witness I) [The defendant and his defense counsel argued that there is no deception by the victim as stated in the judgment, but the defendant's statement in the investigation agency and court on the grounds that the defendant did not have been granted KRW 25 million by the victim despite having been delivered the victim's consent as stated in the judgment is inconsistent; the victim's statement on the conclusion of the construction contract of this case is consistent; the victim's statement is consistent; the victim's statement also conforms to the victim's statement; the victim appears to have actually received consent from the owner, etc. of the access road; the victim is deemed to have made the victim to package the access road actually after the delivery of KRW 25 million to the victim; the defendant used the money received from the victim for personal purposes; the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is without merit].

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;