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

Punishment of the crime

On November 21, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for six months in the Seoul Northern District Court for fraud, etc. on January 17, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive.

On May 208, 2008, the Defendant may receive the special shopping mall sales from the victim D in the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building B building C by recognizing the status of the double-swing facility operator if he/she purchases one punishment of the greenhouse of the E Farming Association.

In making an investment, it made a false statement to the effect that 110% of the profits will be earned, and that if the special commercial building is not sold, the investment will be returned by October 2008.

However, the victim who did not engage in farming in the above area is not eligible to receive compensation. However, even if the victim received the investment from the victim, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to allow the victim to sell the commercial building, and even if the victim did not purchase the commercial building, the victim did not intend to return the investment money paid by the victim.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above, and 1 million won on May 24, 2008, around May 25, 2008, around 1 million won on May 25, 2008, around 2008, KRW 8 million on May 29, 2008, KRW 30 million on June 20, 2008, KRW 47 million on June 27, 2008, and KRW 10 million on June 28, 2008.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the witness D;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A contract to delegate purchasing real estate;

1. A certificate of remittance confirmation;

1. Official text;

1. Account details;

1. Previous convictions in the judgment: The results of inquiry [the defendant and his defense counsel knew that the damaged person was a lawful method of selling the above special commercial building and there was a case where the defendant was sold the special commercial building, such as the facts constituting the crime, and there was no intention or deception on the part of the accused;

The argument is asserted.

However, it stated that the victim suspected of being able to sell special commercial buildings due to lack of qualification has shown that the sale of special commercial buildings is certain.