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

The Defendant introduced the victim C with his name as D, stating that “the Defendant retired from office as the chief of the orchard Police Station, was the Police University, and was the motive and motive of the E former Police Agency, the vehicle siren project at present, and the monthly rent of KRW 30 million in the building in Northwest and Southwest,” and that he was a person with power and power, and that he was a person with the head of the Tong.” The Defendant stated that “any property and the head of the Tong cannot be used as a seizure of the wife and the divorce lawsuit.”

However, the defendant, as a recipient of basic living who is engaged in agriculture at the time, was only 100,000 won per month and did not have worked as the chief of the police station.

The Defendant received a total of KRW 10 million from October 2012 to December 2012 from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim to take the property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint, statement of payment, loan certificate;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The sentence shall be determined as per the order within the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines, considering the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant had the same criminal record for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, the poor character of the crime is given in light of the content of deception of the crime in this case, the fact that the victim did not agree with the victim, the fact that the victim's health is not good, the deposited KRW 7.5 million for the victim, and the reflection thereof, etc.