A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Punishment of the crime

Around August 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “D” operated by the victim C in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan City B market, “A person who has old funeral service, who is believed to sell a large number of fruits and would pay the price up to October 30, 2009 if he/she is on credit.”

However, even if the defendant is supplied with an excessive work from the injured party, the defendant did not have the intent and ability to pay the price.

The defendant, from the time of the occurrence, was supplied to the injured party with an excessive amount of KRW 4,00,000 from tin, that is, the same year.

9. Until Police Officers were supplied three times as indicated in the list of crimes, 12,920,000 won in total from the victims by the same method.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including the part concerning the C's statement);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (report of interview with complainants);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, Articles 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 subparag. 1 subparag. 2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes is that the defendant led to confession and reflects against the crime of this case at the examination stage of the prosecution of this case, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment exceeding the same kind or fine in this case. Meanwhile, in this case, the defendant was deemed to have committed the crime from the beginning by arranging the first transaction with the victim only for several months after the defendant was placed in front of the prosecution, and the defendant was committed a planned crime from the beginning. The defendant, even though the victim was arrested and investigated on March 2015, even after the victim was arrested on March 2015, the contact was cut down at the time, and the damage was not recovered at all.