A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of fraud around December 27, 2013 is not guilty. This judgment is among the judgment.

Punishment of the crime

On July 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the E office operated by the Defendant in Gunsan-si, Inc., Ltd., that “I would act on behalf of the Defendant to obtain permission to collect earth and stones from the Gunsan-si, I would like to develop from F when paying the service cost, and 23 lots of land.”

However, the defendant was operated at the time of fact

E has been operated in so-called “return prevention” form because the enemy has been accumulated for several years since its financial position was very poor. At the time, there was no particular asset or income in the Defendant’s debt amounting to approximately KRW 250 million, and there was no cost to perform services, such as environmental impact assessment, disaster impact assessment, etc. that are essential for obtaining permission for the collection of earth and stones due to the lack of any specific asset or income, and thus, there was no intention or ability to perform services related to permission for the collection of earth and stones as stipulated in the agreement, even if it is paid from the

As above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the above H; (b) received cash of KRW 35 million in the name of around the 28th of the same month from the J, a partner of H; and (c) received cash of KRW 5 million in the same name as around November 1 of the same year; and (d) received money of KRW 15 million in the name of November 14 of the same year from the Defendant’s Saemaul Bank account in the name of the Defendant for three times in total, such as receiving money of KRW 5 million in the name of the Defendant.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

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

1. The witness H and K’s respective legal statements [The defendant, according to the above macroscopic evidence, even if there was no cost to conduct an environmental impact assessment, disaster impact assessment, etc. essential to the permission to collect earth and rocks, the defendant will proceed with the services related to the permission

In other words, a total of KRW 55 million has been paid from the victim, and it is recognized that the money has been used as office operating expenses, etc.