A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

In E office operated by D on September 23, 2016, the Defendant changed the business income to a transportation company after the change in the structure of a flooded vehicle, and if a rolling stock is operated by D on September 23, 2016, the Defendant would make a structural change to the money and pay a loan to D on a monthly basis.

“A false representation was made.”

However, the defendant was awarded a successful bid of 25,500,000 won fire vehicles on the F auction site, but he was awarded a successful bid by borrowing money from the other persons;

In addition, there was a debt of approximately KRW 80 million, and there was no particular income. In addition, the structure of a fire-fighting vehicle was modified, and it was thought that it was sold through the middle and high speed instead of entering and using it. Therefore, even if it was given a loan from the injured party, there was no intention or ability to change it as well as to change it.

Nevertheless, the Defendant deceiving D as above and, through D, took over KRW 33 million under the name of the Defendant’s bank account in the name of the Defendant on September 23, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A report on investigation (verification of a suspect's statement) and a report on investigation (Submission of suspect data);

1. Application of the Automobile Registration Register (A) and the credit information-related Acts and subordinate statutes to the defendant;

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. As to the Defendant’s assertion and determination of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da14

1. The summary of the argument is that the Defendant, who received a loan from the injured party, changed the lane by which the fire fighting vehicle of this case can be used, carried out business at the construction site, and repaid the loan principal, but he did not repay the loan principal with the wind that the construction site where the Defendant intended to work, so the Defendant shall be obtained by deception.