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

Around May 31, 2010, the Defendant calls the victim D at the Defendant’s home located atHanam-si, Hahnam-si, and falsely speaks that “I will receive 2 million won from the victim to the Defendant’s bank account in the name of the Defendant’s bank account from the victim, i.e., to receive 2 million won in the name of the Defendant’s bank account from the victim, and received money from the victim in the same manner as on June 10, 2010.” The Defendant received money from the victim by phone to the victim “I will receive NA money from the customer who will receive the credit payment to pay 5 million won in the same manner.” The Defendant received NA money from the victim to the victim from May 31, 2010 to the sum of 30,000 won from May 31, 2016.”

However, at the time, the Defendant was not engaged in the business of supplying frozen fishery products, but was removed from the fishery market, and did not have any transaction partner who would pay credit or receive the transaction payment. On December 2010, the Defendant had been well aware of funeral services on the street and had been operated with the money that was collected from the victim’s money in the street store. However, even if he did not have any actual profits due to the fact that he had been well aware of funeral services, he did not have any intention or ability to pay credit, even if he did not borrow money from the victim because he did not have any specific assets.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received a total of 63,700,000 won from the victim through the 16 times as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Article 347 of the Criminal Act of this Act concerning criminal facts.