However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On October 19, 2015, the Defendant stated that “When the construction work commences, the Defendant would pay KRW 6 million as an advance payment on the day before the opening of the office interior work, and the remainder KRW 6,290,000,000,000 if the construction work is completed, the Defendant would make payment to the victim D, a construction business operator, at an ambiguous coffee shop located in Heung-gu, Seodong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu.” As the victim demanded advance payment on the following day, “if the construction work commences in a foreign country first, the Defendant would make the payment for the construction work later.”

However, the fact that the E operation of the defendant was not properly operated, and the monthly income was almost nonexistent, and there was no other property and there was no intention or ability to pay the construction cost even if the victim is responsible for the office construction work.

Nevertheless, the Defendant deceiving the victim as above, and caused the victim to do so to do the office interior work from October 21, 2015 to October 27, 2015.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, caused the victim to perform artificial insemination work in an amount equivalent to KRW 12290,000 for construction cost, and exempted the victim from paying the above construction cost, thereby acquiring property profits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Part concerning D statements concerning the suspect interrogation protocol of the police second time against the defendant

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of the statutes governing a written estimate of construction works and contracts for construction works;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for the reason that the suspended execution is more than Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that it is against the time of the crime, and the entire amount of damage is deposited);