The Defendant is a person who operates a culture of the former Donnam-do.

On March 6, 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 10 million to the victim in E office operated by the victim D, which was operated by the victim D on March 6, 2015, as the down payment on the day, and the intermediate payment of KRW 10 million until May 27, 2015, and KRW 10 million until August 27, 2015.

“A false statement” was made.

However, in fact, the defendant was extremely difficult to pay more than KRW 100 million to financial institutions at the time, and even if he was supplied with a failure from the injured party, he did not have the intent or ability to pay the price.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and acquired 10,000,000 won, which is the total sum of 30,000,000 won, from the injured person on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D (Supplement of complainants);

1. A copy of the contract for trading the former seeds and seedlings, and replies to requests for cooperation in investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (referring to the confirmation of personal credit information of suspects);

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment, and reasons for sentencing of imprisonment;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] General Fraud (less than KRW 100 million) in the basic area (from June to one year and six months) (the person who is subject to special sentencing)

2. It is inevitable to sentence sentence the Defendant who has agreed with the victim or has not made any other effort to recover from damage even though the amount of the money obtained through deception of this case is not much specified.

In determining the specific sentence, the fact that the defendant is against himself and has the record of being punished several times, but the fact that there is no written punishment for the same crime as the case in this case is considered as favorable circumstances to the defendant, and all other circumstances shown in the arguments in this case, such as the age, sex, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime.