A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and four months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[Criminal Records] Defendant A was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on July 17, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 15, 2014.

[Criminal facts] 2017 Highest 3491 (Defendant A)

1. Defendant A, around March 4, 2013, at the “F” architectural designer office operated by the victim E located in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building C building D, Defendant A thought that “F will build a 1st underground floor and 14th floor officetels in Gwangju Mine-gu G,” and Defendant A will pay KRW 170,000,000 per week for the architectural design.

The author made a false statement to “Academbling with the prop and prepared the books of permission in preparation for money.”

However, in fact, Defendant A was unable to prepare the sales price of the above officetel site or the construction cost at the time, and the construction of an officetel was in a false state due to the failure to enter into a sales contract for the above site, and there was no intention or ability to pay the design cost even if the above officetel construction design cost was provided from the injured party due to the lack of particular property and import

Defendant

A, as seen above, deceiving the victim, received a design document submitted at the time of deliberation on the construction of the instant officetel from the injured party on April 24, 2013, and around April 2013, A had the victim complete the design document submitted at the time of the instant officetel construction permit and did not pay approximately KRW 85 million for the design document up to that time.

2. On November 14, 2013, Defendant A sought to change the cost of design of an officetel in the office of Defendant A located in the wife population H in Chungcheongnam-si around November 14, 2013, and the above victim found to have changed the cost of design of the office of Defendant A, “A is scheduled to construct a house on the whole land unit of the wife population I in Chungcheongnam-si, and there is a change in the architectural design because the money was soon raised. The design cost of the office of Gwangju would be paid between the two.

“A false statement” was made.

However, in fact, Defendant A was unable to prepare the sale price or construction cost of the said electric power resource site at the time.