A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

To the extent that it does not substantially disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense, the following facts charged shall be organized and criminal facts shall be recognized:

The defendant and the victim C are the space between September 201 and October 2014.

On February 1, 2012, the Defendant was planning to leave the victim to travel with the victim on the day, but on the same day, the Defendant called the victim’s phone at a non-place and called “to be viewed as a Cheongju where his father is living.” In other words, the Defendant told the victim that “I will pay back if he borrowed only KRW 20 million as his father needs to undergo surgery at the present time when he was judged to have his father’s cancer.”

However, in fact, the defendant was the victim's Cheongju in order to avoid wind with other women, but did not get the Cheongju or his father did not have been judged to be Cheongju.

Ultimately, the Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim, and then deceiving the victim, KRW 15 million from the victim on February 1, 2012, KRW 3 million from February 2, 2012, KRW 20 million from the delivery on February 7, 2012, and KRW 20 million from the victim on February 7, 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. A complaint;

1. The loan certificate (2.2 million won), bank transaction statement, and statement of transaction by item [the defendant and the defense counsel have received 20 million won from the injured party], but the defendant asserts to the effect that it is not by deceiving the injured party, but by deceiving the injured party, that the injured party's money was donated to the defendant.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of each judgment, the victim stated to the effect that the victim was a money that the victim lent, not a money that the victim donated to the defendant, to the investigation agency to this court, and the defendant also made a statement from the prosecutor's office to the victim on February 2012.