A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Punishment of the crime

On September 24, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months for fraud at the Incheon District Court, which was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on December 23, 2015. On January 27, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on January 27, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 4, 2016.

On June 21, 2010, the Defendant acquired the right to sell the 8 to 11st floor of the building in South-gu, Incheon, to the victim E in the building in Seoul, and is the actual representative of the Co., Ltd. D, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership until July 2010.

1. As seen, the Plaintiff made a false statement to the effect that the Plaintiff was “.”

However, at the time, the Defendant was not able to complete the construction, and there was no intention or ability to complete the registration of ownership transfer for the 802 heading room, since the Defendant did not have the ability to repay the existing obligation to beneficiaries, etc. first, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to complete the registration of ownership transfer for the 802 heading room.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 35,00,000,000, in total, from the injured party under the pretext of down payment and intermediate payment on July 22, 2010, as well as KRW 35,000,000, in total, on July 23, 2010.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Written complaint, C supply contract, deposit sheet and remittance details, judgment (five times a month) and data on the register;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of each case's summary information-related Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as each written judgment (13,15) and criminal history;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the reason for sentencing provided for in Article 39 (1) of the same Act;

1. Since the crime in the judgment is ex post facto concurrent crimes, the sentencing criteria do not apply.

2. The amount of defraudation is not so big and the damage is not recovered at all even after a considerable period of time, and the victim and the victim due to the instant crime.