A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who has operated a travelr with the trade name “C” in substantial Gu B in Cheongju-si.

1. Around March 21, 2017, the Defendant’s fraud related to the Dong European Travel Expenses: (a) heard from D, an employee employee of the above C office, the victim E wanted to obtain the Dong Europe Travel Goods; (b) instructed D to “If the victim deposits KRW 10 million in advance with the payment of the flight ticket, the remaining KRW 10 million shall be borne by C; (c) if the 15 persons are collected, the 2.1.9 million travel expenses per person shall be provided from May 14, 2017 to May 24, 2017; and (d) D calls the victim under the direction of the Defendant to make a false statement to the effect as above.

However, in fact, the Defendant had been in excess of the obligation due to a large amount of debt owed to financial institutions, etc., and failed to pay the price of other travel goods previously sold, and operated the travel agency by the so-called “fluoring” method, so even if the Defendant received money from the victim as travel expenses, he did not intend to use it as expenses for personal debt repayment and other travel goods, and did not have the intent or ability to provide the victim

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 10 million from the victim to the Nong Bank account under C’s name on the same day, and received KRW 36,280,000 from 13 victims in the same manner as indicated in the attached crime list between around that time to May 11, 2017, or acquired it by credit card.

2. On March 23, 2017, the Defendant, at the above travel agency office of the Jeju-do, offered 380,000 won per victim F, per capita, and 2,660,000 won per victim, per 7,000 won, to offer goods for Jeju-do travel on a 3-day basis.

“The purpose of “ was to make a false statement.”

However, in fact, the defendant is as described in paragraph (1).