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

On March 15, 2017, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 30 million to the victim. The victim paid KRW 30 million to the victim. The victim agreed to sell large wave cultivated at approximately approximately approximately approximately approximately KRW 20 million on the land level of Gangseo-gu Busan, D, E, and 200 on the land level. The contract deposit was concluded to pay KRW 7 million on the date of the contract and the remainder of KRW 23 million on March 30, 2017. On the date of the contract, the Defendant paid the down payment to the victim KRW 7 million on the date of the contract, but the balance did not be paid on the fixed date.

In April 2017, the Defendant: (a) was liable to pay the balance under the above contract to the financial institutions loan liabilities of approximately KRW 68,88 million in total at the time, and the amount of approximately KRW 99,000,000,000,000 to the branch, etc.; (b) had been delayed due to the decline in the market price; and (c) had been in a situation where the payment of the balance under the above contract was delayed; and (d) had no intent and ability to pay the said balance even if it was supplied by the victim, the Defendant acquired it by the victim who believed it by means of the false statement that “I would pay 2,00,000,000 won every day on the face of a large wave from the victim who believed it.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police interrogation protocol of the accused (including a substitute interrogation);

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Investigation report (in relation to credit information of a suspect);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing pre-sale transactions of agricultural crops and cash custody certificates;

1. Relevant laws concerning criminal facts, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. In light of the fact that the Defendant was punished for the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud on two occasions during the reason of sentencing Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, and that the crime of this case was committed again and the damage from the crime of this case was not small, a serious punishment against the Defendant is needed.

However, the defendant's mistake.