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

On July 2012, the Defendant: (a) at a screen golf course for the operation of the victim of the victim’s Do located on the first floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Building, the Defendant was scheduled to operate a parking lot in accordance with the “E” parking lot management right; (b) the contract would soon be concluded; (c) if an investment of KRW 20 million necessary as down payment is made, the Defendant would give KRW 32,400,000 per month for a total of KRW 2,700,000 per month; and (d) was remitted from the victim on July 26, 2013 to the Defendant’s account.

However, at the time, the Defendant did not have any possibility to secure the right to manage the parking lot of the “Fewing Hall”, and the Defendant had no intent or ability to repay the money to the victim because it was intended to receive money from the victim and to use it with repayment of the debt.

In addition, on August 22, 2012, the Defendant: (a) falsely stating that “The Defendant borrowed money to the victim in a sudden manner; (b) around December 2012, 2012, he/she received a request for parking management from G head office and the Sports Center located in the Olympic Team; (c) by December 15, 2012, the Defendant was transferred KRW 15 million to the Defendant’s account from the victim around August 22, 2012.”

However, at the time, the Defendant had had no intention or ability to repay the amount to the victim because it had been intended to receive money from the victim and to use it as repayment of the obligation.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received a total of KRW 33 million from the victim on two occasions, thereby deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is the past.