Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 9, 2011, the Defendant stated that “A victim C who had been aware of the amount of sales on credit in the transaction place is not the amount of sales on credit, so he/she shall be repaid within one month, and he/she shall be repaid within three months at the latest.”

However, the Defendant was in arrears with approximately KRW 40,000,000, such as building rents and electricity charges at the time, so even if he borrowed money from the injured party, the Defendant did not have an intention or ability to change it within one month as agreed.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received delivery of KRW 10 million on February 10, 201 from the injured party.

2. On February 14, 2011, the Defendant: (a) called “the victim by telephone from the fluorial land” (hereinafter “fishing goods”) and left the store now.

It is urgently necessary to pay cash.

A false statement was made, “The amount of KRW 5 million shall be paid, additional 600,000 won shall be paid, and the remainder of the borrowed money shall be paid immediately, from among the amounts sold and first borrowed on the following day.”

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the amount in accordance with the promise even if he borrowed money from the damaged person, such as Paragraph 1 at the time.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was transferred KRW 6 million from the victim to the account in the name of the wife, on the same day.

[Defendant and defense counsel asserted that the defendant was paid 16 million won as investment money from the injured party, and at the time, goods kept in a fishing room had the value of 1 billion won at the market price, and the injured party was considerably high in the amount of fishing goods brought to the substitute, so the defendant and defense counsel had the intention and ability to repay and had no deception.

However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the Defendant’s building rents and charges as stated in its reasoning.