A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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

[2011 Highest 9521] The Defendant is the actual operator of D from October 2010.

The Defendant had been in bad credit standing since around 1997, while operating (State) E and (State F, etc., a telegraph of D, the Defendant was at least KRW 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, and there was no asset in the name of the Defendant.

The Defendant purchased four parcels of Ha, I, J, and K from L to 61,4250,00 won, and sought six consent above. However, the Defendant obtained the consent to use the said parcel of land on the condition that L would purchase the said parcel of land by borrowing the said parcel of land as a collateral after completion of the penta construction due to the lack of land purchase funds.

Moreover, as the Defendant secured the site under the above conditions, even if he obtained the above land, etc. as a security, he paid L with the land sale price, and there was no way to prepare the construction price in addition to the pent-out price, and there was no way to repay the existing debts. Therefore, even if the victim M did the above pent-construction work, he did not have the intent or ability to receive the pent-out loan as security and pay the construction price.

Nevertheless, on April 26, 2011, the Defendant presented the victim’s consent to the use of the L in the above (State) D office located adjacent to the Busan Dong-gu N, Busan, the Defendant concluded that “The Defendant would receive a loan from the bank after completion of the penta construction work, if there is land in which the penta is located, and pay the construction cost.”

Although the Defendant had the victim from that time until June 20, 201, the Defendant had the victim perform construction works equivalent to KRW 217 million at the above site of pention construction, the Defendant paid KRW 30 million, which is a part of the construction cost, and did not pay KRW 184 million, and acquired the money by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness M andO.