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

On February 24, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Suwon District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 11, 2012.

On September 5, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C that “I will leave the kindergarten building.” On September 30, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “I will leave the kindergarten building.” On September 30, 2010, the Defendant sent the victim KRW 1,000,000 to the “E” design office, “I will deliver the building design deposit to B in cash.” On October 5, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim that “I will promptly purchase the iron bars in cash. B, if you transfer KRW 5 million to B, I will purchase the iron bars.”

However, as above, the defendant thought that he would use the money for personal purposes, so that he did not request the design to the design office or to purchase iron bars and did not have the intention or ability to construct the kindergarten to the victim.

Nevertheless, around September 30, 2010, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 1 million in cash as a contract deposit for construction design expenses from the victim, and received KRW 5 million in cash from the victim on or around October 6, 2010, and acquired KRW 6 million in total through the account of community credit cooperatives (F) in the name of the Defendant. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 22420, Oct. 6, 2010>

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Response to the provision of financial transaction information;

1. Investigation report (Erchitectural Design Office);

1. Previous convictions: References to criminal records, investigation reports (reports on previous convictions, written judgments and summary orders attached thereto);

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

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Act was not the recovery of damage.