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

The defendant pays 30,000,000 won to the applicant for compensation by deceit.

3.2

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was a person who operated the real estate brokerage office called “E Real Estate” in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D.

The Defendant, at the above real estate office around February 19, 2003, concluded that the victim C (28 years of age) had much real estate in which the Defendant saw that there was a lot of real estate in which the Defendant she saw, and that “The Defendant would sell the construction company with a lot of less than 20,000 won for the G-owned land located in Bupyeong-gu, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon to sell the said land to the construction company with a lot of money of 30 million won or more, and if the money is temporarily needed to lend money, within 1-2 months, the Defendant would sell the said land to the construction company and offer 90 million won with its profit.”

However, there was no plan for sale of the above G site at the time, and there was no defendant's ability to receive such plan, as well as there was no confirmation of the defendant with respect to the above G site, and as the process itself is unclear, there was no intention or ability to return 90 million won to the victim within two months, as promised.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and received 30 million won from the victim under the pretext of investment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the defendant and H in part;

1. C’s legal statement;

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

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, a copy of an investment contract, and a certified copy;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 25 (1) and 31 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Litigation Promotion, etc. of Compensation Orders;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that they borrowed the money of this case while offering shares to the victim as collateral, and they did not intend to deceive the victim.

We examine the following circumstances, i.e., the Defendant., based on the aforementioned evidence.