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

1. On June 14, 2013, the Defendant acquired money in the name of an advance payment for the collection of recyclables, by fraud, the victim E at the D office located in Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, saying, “The Defendant shall guarantee the collection of recyclables from the G logistics warehouse in F for a period of two years, and may enter into a contract with the two places of another logistics warehouse located in the same logistics base.” As such, at the advance payment, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “the calculation is made by deducting recyclables from advance payment one million won per month.”

However, even if the Defendant received advance payments from the injured party, he did not have any intention or ability to ensure that the injured party can collect recyclables discharged from the above G logistics warehouse for two years, and there was no intention or ability to have another logistics warehouse and the injured party enter into a consignment contract between another logistics warehouse and the injured party for the disposal of recyclables.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received transfer of KRW 15 million from the post office account (Account Number I) in the name of H on June 14, 2016, under the pretext of advance payment from the victim, and received transfer of KRW 15 million around June 20, 2013. < Amended by Act No. 11849, Jun. 20, 2013>

2. On August 6, 2013, the Defendant acquired money in the name of the construction cost, by telephone to the said victim E, and the said victim E was awarded a 40 million won for the repair work of a warehouse, and the construction work has not been commenced due to the lack of construction cost.

In the beginning of the construction work, the payment for the construction work shall be paid immediately, and the payment for the construction work shall be paid by false means.

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay the construction price, even if he borrowed the construction price, because he did not pay the total amount of the debts such as national taxes in arrears due to the absence of any particular income.

The defendant deceivings the victim as such.