On July 17, 2009, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years for special robbery at the Incheon District Court on July 17, 2009, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 25, 2009, and is currently in the grace period.

On February 2, 2010, the Defendant called “E” restaurant operated by Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, that “Abert police officers,” provided the victim F with large aid to G that is running various projects, such as scrap metal business in the past, and provided the part of the scrap metal business to B. If G only funds to purchase the closed engine, it was promised to use equipment such as for free use, and to secure the sales place, and thus, it would be able to impose a large amount of money when operating the said business.”

However, G did not undertake the above promise to the Defendant in relation to the scrap metal business, and the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the proceeds to the victim by promoting the scrap metal business even if it did not receive any investment funds from the victim because there was no specific business plan, funds, or dissolution of the closed engine.

As a result, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was given KRW 10 million in total, around February 5, 2010 and KRW 20 million in around May 2010 to the victim as investment money.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement made to F and D;

1. Details of passbook transactions;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Relevant legal provisions on criminal facts: A sentence shall be imposed on the defendant, and the statutory detention shall be exempted, comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) the crime under Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act is a crime during the period of suspension of execution of the reason for sentencing; (b) the Defendant has repaid 1.5 million won to the victim; (c) the Defendant has not been guilty of fraud; (d) the Defendant is in depth against the Defendant; and (e

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.