A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant and the victim C are the same as the Do elementary school in Osan-si.

In a place where spring light is unknown in 2006, the Defendant stated, “The Defendant is working in relation to the apartment construction project, and will make an investment in the apartment construction project in Bupyeong-gu, Gyeonggi-do. When making an investment, the Defendant would pay interest of 2% to 5% per month and redeem the total amount of the investment within 3 months and 6 months.”

However, the Defendant, at the time of the mobile phone construction, operated “(E)”, “F”, and “G” as a company that manufactures the mobile phone, but did not work related to the apartment construction project as above, and was planned to use the said company’s operating fund by receiving money from the victim due to the shortage of funds from the said company. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the principal and interest even if receiving the investment money from others.

On June 29, 2006, the Defendant received total of KRW 619,500,000 from November 4, 2006, by deceiving the victim as such and receiving KRW 100,000 from the Agricultural Cooperatives head of H under the name of H, as shown in the list of crimes, from November 4, 2006.

Summary of Evidence

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Copies of the protocol of trial in cases of Suwon District Court 2010 Godan2062;

1. Details of passbook transactions;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel as to the investigation report (Submission of transaction data of the suspect), investigation report (Submission of the suspect A specification of transactions)

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant actually invested KRW 200 million in the apartment construction project among the funds invested by the victim as stated in its reasoning, and the apartment construction project is not run properly, and the defendant used the remaining funds invested by the victim as the company's funds, etc., and it is only to receive investments from the victim as stated in its reasoning.