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

1. Around January 25, 2008, the Defendant stated that “The Victim F is establishing H R R R R Rart in Young-gun G in Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Ulsan-do, U.S., and the amount of money needs to be loaned to purchase the access road to the inspection.” Since three years thereafter, the Defendant would pay the principal and pay interest equivalent to the amount of money.”

However, the Defendant did not have fixed income as a well-known son, and the expected amount of the construction of H R Rhoby was about KRW 35 billion, and the Defendant did not have the ability to pay the construction cost, and even though J was the sole property of the Defendant, the J was not a property of a nature that the Defendant may dispose of at will due to its inspection, but a property of a nature that the Defendant could dispose of at will, in particular, because the J had already set the right to collateral security of KRW 130 million with the maximum debt amount, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the payment even if he borrowed money from the victim.

The defendant was given a cash of KRW 27.5 million on the job by the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. Around June 24, 2014, the Defendant stated that “The victim F would have been sold in lots the H Hennnnn't constructed in the Hen's Young-gu, and will be able to live together with the believers. If 50 million won is paid, the Defendant would pay the money as sales contract in combination with the amount of KRW 27.5 million already borrowed the money after using it to the Hen's Music Council.”

However, even if the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim from the beginning, he did not think that the Defendant would pay the Hnnishing sales contract under the victim’s name, and in particular, because the Hnishing sales contract was managed by the Hnishing team, the Defendant did not have the authority to sell the Hnishing sales contract.

The Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim as the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant, around July 8, 2014.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.