A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Justice] On October 18, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court on December 16, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 16, 2013.

On October 16, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to two years and six months in Seoul High Court to imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), etc. on October 24, 2014.

[Criminal facts] The Defendant is a person who has been engaged in the business of selling high import tea in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “C”.

On May 2012, the Defendant was requested by the victim D to sell the EWz E350 car, which is owned by the victim.

Around June 2012, the Defendant stated, “B” to the victim, “A person who wishes to purchase the vehicle at KRW 27 million from the other party. The prospective purchaser would wish to report the vehicle.”

However, in fact, even if the defendant received the above car from the victim, he sold it to the capital company and intended to use the selling price as the defendant's business fund, etc., and there was no intention or ability to pay the sales price normally to the victim because there was a situation over KRW 200,000 at the time.

Ultimately, around June 4, 2012, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as such; and (b) received from the victim the above “B” a delivery of the said car worth KRW 27 million at the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Automobile register;

1. Before ruling: Criminal records and the application of applicable statutes of each judgment;

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, the choice of imprisonment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. It is unfavorable that the money acquired by the defendant for sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is not a large amount.

On the other hand, the principle of equity with the judgment that became final and conclusive should be taken into account. The defendant, who was sentenced to imprisonment on October 16, 2014, deceiving or deceiving the F, etc.