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

On May 24, 2016, the Defendant is the representative operating the Defendant’s “E” company at the victim D’s residence located in Jeju-si around May 24, 2016. In Jeju-si, the Defendant is responsible for and completed the construction of the second floor-to-story detached house extension construction of F’s building located in F at Jeju-si.

First of all, the contract deposit was changed to KRW 20,000 to be used as the cost of purchasing construction materials.

However, in fact, the Defendant was engaged in the daily occupation at the time, but was not a representative operating the “E” company, and was in bad credit standing, and thus, the Defendant was able to consume money from the damaged person, such as rent and deposit, living expenses, personnel expenses and material expenses of warehouse construction in which the Defendant was living separately, and there was no intention or ability to undertake the requested construction even if he received money from the damaged person.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and received cash 20 million won from the injured party, namely, a down payment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, each investigation report (in addition to the details of receipt, G Construction Office's staff and currency);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of imprisonment with labor as a matter of choice (Consideration to the fact that considerable damage has not been recovered);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (The reflection of the fact, the fact that there is no criminal record for the same kind of crime, the amount of fraud, etc.);