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

The defendant is the owner of a house of Da-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnamsan-gun (room 23 households).

1. On February 25, 2006, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the victim D and the studio 101 of the above multi-household housing as the leased term “from February 25, 2006 to February 24, 2007,” and the lease deposit “20 million won,” and the Defendant said that the lease deposit would be returned normally upon the expiration of the lease term to the victim.

However, even if the lease term of E and F, the former lessee of the above 101, expired on March 9, 2005, the Defendant failed to pay the lease deposit of KRW 17 million, and E and F established the lease registration on October 25, 2005 as to the above 101, and the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the lease deposit normally to the victim because financial situation, such as failure to pay the lease deposit even though the lease term has expired for other stud tenants than 101.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained 20 million won as the deposit for lease from the victim on the same day.

2. On February 26, 2006, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the victim B and the above multi-household 105 on the leased term “2, 2006.2.26, from February 26, 2006 to February 25, 2007,” and the lease deposit “20 million won,” and the Defendant said that the lease deposit would be returned normally upon the expiration of the lease term to the victim.

However, the Defendant did not pay KRW 17 million to G, the former lessee of the above 105, even after the lease term expires on February 24, 2005. However, on March 25, 2005, G established the lease registration as to the above 105, and it is not good financial situation, such as failure to pay the lease deposit even if the lease term expires for other original tenants.