On October 15, 2017, the Defendant called “B” to the victim B at an unsound place and called “B” as the representative of the C Incorporated Agricultural Company. The Defendant supplied Kim Jong-un and worship to the place designated by the internal branch of the city, saying, “The Defendant would immediately pay the price.”

However, in fact, the kimchi business operated by the defendant was directed to the enemy continuously, from the year 2010 to the customer, due to the failure to pay the credit amount, such as the trend of distribution and the powder powder, etc., the accumulated debt amount at the time of 2017 exceeded KRW 400 million, and was under severe economic pressure. Even if the kimchi was processed and sold, the profit cannot be used for repayment of other debts in preference to the victim, so even if it was supplied by the victim, there was no intention or ability to pay the amount properly.

Nevertheless, around October 17, 2017, the Defendant received a total of KRW 107,543,340,000, from the victim’s 19 times as indicated in the separate crime list from around that time to December 1, 2017, a “E”-type kimchi factory located in Chungcheongnam-si, which is designated by the Defendant, to be supplied with Kim Yong-type at the market price of KRW 7,425,00 in an amount equivalent to KRW 7,500, as well as from around that time to December 1, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the police concerning the defendant's legal statement B - Copy of the indictment;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, reference reports (A), investigation reports (verification of the same criminal records of a suspect and reporting of fraud related to a suspect);

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to a crime, Article 347(1) of the choice of a sentence, and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, and the defendant, for the reason of sentencing of imprisonment, deceptioned another person and was subject to multiple criminal punishments on several occasions,

Considering the degree of damage suffered by the victim and the fact that the defendant did not pay the victim the amount of damage.