A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant stated “E” in the bill of indictment at Dongducheon-si, Dongducheon-si, but this is deemed to be a clerical error, so such correction shall be made accordingly.

In the name of AF, “G” is a person who operates a mutually binding store in the name of AF.

From the beginning of April 2019, the Defendant concluded that “The Defendant would pay the price by the end of the following month if the Defendant supplied the high-class heating product” to BU, the operator of the Victim BT Co., Ltd., Ltd., which was the above steel store.”

However, in fact, even if the Defendant received the above materials from the victim, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the above materials as promised because the Defendant was an urgent situation in which the cumulative debt repayment and the payment of agreed money, which was paid in the name of F and F of the Defendant, would be an amount equivalent to KRW 200 million.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim as such, obtained 361,732,80 won in total from April 10, 2019 to June 11, 2019 from the victim and acquired them by deception.

The prosecutor prosecuted the supply of each of the above heats as substantive concurrent crimes under the charge that "the supply of the above heats in an amount equivalent to KRW 121,862,00,000 for supply on April 30, 2019; the supply of the heats in an amount equivalent to KRW 133,734,00 for supply on May 31, 2019; and the supply of the heats in an amount equivalent to KRW 73,252,00 for supply on June 30, 2019; and obtained the supply of the heats in an amount equivalent to KRW 361,732,80 for supply."

However, according to the evidence, the Defendant, who is the same victim, acquired satisfys over several times by means of the same criminal act with a single criminal intent with respect to BT, which constitutes a single comprehensive crime, and the time and completion period of the crime is also recognized as “from April 10, 2019 to June 11, 2019,” unlike the written indictment.

Even if the part stated in the facts charged is corrected as above, it would be likely to seriously disadvantage the defendant's exercise of defense.