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

The Defendant is a person engaged in real estate implementation business, and on September 1, 2012, the Defendant is operating a restaurant if he/she opened a new construction work of “C golf course” located in Incheon reinforcement Gun to the injured party B at the influence hall located in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government calendar on September 1, 2012.

In addition to golf clubs, 3 billion won may be punished during the construction period of 3 and 4 years, such as golf cartels, riding courses, and fishing boats.

In addition, the term "50 million won is changed to the construction cost that reduces the operation right of the restaurant."

However, at the time, the above "C golf course" was not in operation since it was not reported on the commencement of construction, and it was in the state of not becoming final and conclusive loans from financial institutions, so even if the defendant receives money from the complainant, he did not use it as construction costs or have no intention or ability to grant the right to operate the restaurant.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received a cash sum of five million won from the victim to June 30, 2014, from the victim, and acquired the said “C golf course” under the name of the said “C golf course construction cost, soil and sand transport construction work contract, landscaping construction contract, etc., 15 times in total, including the name of the said “C golf course”, “C golf course” as indicated in the attached list of crimes from the time to June 30, 2014, by obtaining cash or checks, or a new bank account in the name of D, the Defendant, who is the child of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. A written promise and a detailed statement of account transactions;

1. Application of investigation reports (Attachment of Details of D Account Transactions to the Acts and subordinate statutes);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. Although the punishment of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is reasonable, taking into account the fact that it appears that the crime of defraudation was not committed, and that the total amount of damage was repaid, and that there is no record exceeding the same kind and fine, the age, sex, environment, circumstances of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.