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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On April 21, 2015, the Defendant, at the office of the Defendant’s operation C (State) (hereinafter “C”) located on the sixth floor of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B Building (hereinafter “C”), proposed the conclusion of a sales agency contract to the victim D, stating that “The Defendant was authorized to select a sales agent from F (State) (hereinafter “F”) who is the planning to implement the apartment project of the Namnam Cancer Group E (hereinafter “F”), and that the said apartment will begin construction works for the patrolmen on April 2015, and start the sale of the first patrolmen on July 2015.”

However, in fact C can only play the role of assisting F in the selection of a sales agency, and it did not have the right to independently determine a sales agency. Since F did not procure approximately 16.5 billion won of the project cost required for implementation at the time, there was no guarantee that construction commencement or sales start at the time of the promise.

On April 21, 2015, the Defendant entered into an agency contract with the victim for sale in lots on or around April 21, 2015, and received 20 million won from the damaged party as the deposit money for the performance of the contract in G account under the name of the Defendant’s child.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and H;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A statement of deposit, certified copy of corporate registry, sales agency contract, calendar contract for CM business, response to request for cooperation in investigation;

1. Each investigation report (related to the Yeongdeungpo-gun Office's response to the contents, the F representative IC investigation) / Each investigation report (the defendant and the defense counsel alleged to the effect that the defendant did not deceiving the victim and did not have the intent to acquire it, but the business-based reverse contract can only play the role of supporting F's selection of a sales agent, the contract can only be made by C, the final service company is decided by mutual consultation, and H does not have the authority to select a sales agent with F's actual operator as a sales agent. The defendant stated that C does not have any consultation with F.