A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

On June 13, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years and three years of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, which became final and conclusive on the 21st of the same month.

Criminal facts

The Defendant, around April 2005, at the D office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, told the Victim F to be entrusted with the sale of clothing shops located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, via E, “If the Defendant borrowed KRW 50 million operating funds, he/she will receive a sales agency fee and repay KRW 100 million after one month.”

However, around 2004, the Defendant had already paid the amount of KRW 1 billion, and around January 2005, he borrowed KRW 180,000 from G in the name of operating funds for the sales agency business, etc. and was unable to repay the amount. Even if receiving the sales agency fee, it should be paid by the daily expenses, etc. of the business members, so even if receiving the sales agency fee, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the amount within a given period.

Ultimately, the Defendant, as seen above, committed the crime of KRW 10 million on April 18, 2005 by deceiving the victim and receiving KRW 25 million through E on April 18, 2005, and the same year.

5.2.2.15 million won, which was obtained from the victim in total from three times, including a sum of KRW 50 million, and acquired by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant's partial statement in the fifth trial record;

1. The entry of witnesses F and E in each legal statement in the fourth trial record;

1. Each protocol of suspect interrogation of the accused by the prosecution (including the E and F respective statements);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of criminal records and investigation reports (referring to the filing of criminal records and investigation reports);

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

1. In view of the fact that the amount of damage in this case was KRW 50 million in the grounds for sentencing under the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act to treat concurrent crimes, and that no agreement has been reached with the victim, a sentence of sentence on the defendant is inevitable, except in this case.