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

On April 1, 2010, the Defendant entered into a contract with the victim B and the victim B to sell KRW 70,000,000,000, when he received KRW 20,000 from the victim as the down payment, and acquired the victim’s property from the victim’s property, when he received KRW 20,000,00 from the victim as the down payment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement related to B and F;

1. Documents for the certificate of a contract for the sale of trees;

1. A contract to sell trees;

1. Receipts:

1. A copy of a check;

1. Answers to cooperation matters in investigation;

1. Investigation report (related to the sale of pine trees);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of the following grounds for sentencing, etc.);

1. Probation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 32(1)3 and (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. of the Dismissal of Application for Compensation Orders (the victim has filed a claim for penalty exceeding the amount obtained by deceit, which is a direct physical damage, and it is not reasonable to issue a compensation order). In light of the method of punishment, etc., the nature of the crime is not good, and the defendant committed the instant crime even if he had had a record of being punished three times as fines for the same type of fraud within five years, and the victim has not agreed with the defendant, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, however, it is difficult to see that the substantial damage is larger in accordance with the sentencing guidelines (if the amount of damages that has not been finally recovered is less than 50 million won), and the Defendant appears to be against the Defendant while making a confession of the instant crime.