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

On May 5, 2012, the Defendant told the victim B, who had a relationship of interest near Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S., that “at present, a trial equivalent to KRW 10 million is in progress. In a trial, the Defendant would have to pay the money at this time. There is no money to be used at this time.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not proceed with the above trial, and monthly income was 1.5 million won, and this was not specified, and there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the victim because there was no particular property.

The Defendant received 200,000 won from the victim on the same day, and from around that time to November 3, 2012, the Defendant either received money from the victim 79 times as shown in the attached Table of Crimes by deceiving the victim, or let the victim use the credit card of the victim or pay the installment amount of the vehicle driven by the Defendant on 79 occasions, such as in the attached Table of Crimes. The Defendant received 30,109,920 won from the victim or acquired economic benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning B;

1. Detailed statement of transactions in the agricultural bank passbook which is the complainant;

1. Detailed statement of transactions of a new bank passbook which is the complainant; and

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on details of transactions of agricultural credit cards to complainants;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (see, e.g., the fact that the defendant reflects his depth in this court and that the defendant has endeavored to recover from damage, such as depositing money for the victim);

1. The above facts constituting a crime on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act are crimes falling under the category of general fraud No. 1 on the sentencing guidelines, and no particular aggravated or mitigated factors cannot be seen. Therefore, the Defendant is particularly the Defendant, in particular, at the trial and the record of the instant case within the scope of sentence in