On March 13, 2017, the Defendant would have the victim F (46 years old) who is the representative director of the corporation E in the office of “D” operated by the Defendant in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, to ensure that the Defendant is selected as E inasmuch as the Defendant was fully authorized to implement the new G Housing Construction Corporation from H, a private person executing the new G Housing Construction Corporation.

First of all, if you look at the cost, the cost of introduction is required first, and if it is impossible to proceed with the construction work, the cost will be refunded.

“The purpose of “ was to make a false statement.”

However, the defendant did not have been entrusted with the authority to implement the above construction from the beginning, and he thought that he would use the money from the victim as the living expenses of the defendant, so the company operating the victim did not have the intent or ability to return the introduction expenses.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, obtained the delivery of KRW 20 million from the victim to the new bank account (I) in the name of the Defendant on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A criminal investigation report (to attach a detailed statement of account transactions that has been remitted);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an agreement, cash storage certificate, and inquiry about the results of transfer;

1. That the defendant will have the right to execute the crime against the victim even though he did not have any authority in relation to the selection of a contractor for the reason for sentencing sentencing of imprisonment with prison labor, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts, Article 347 of the

Along with the fact that the defendant acquired 20 million won by fraud, fully withdraws the money only in this framework and consumes all of the personal purposes, the defendant does not recover or agree on the damage to the victim, and that the defendant has the same criminal history as that of the defendant, shall be considered in an unfavorable circumstance.

In addition, together with the amount of the defendant's fraud, the relationship with the victim, etc., the conditions of sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the age and sexual conduct of the defendant.