A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal record] On August 25, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the Daejeon District Court on November 14, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 14, 2016.

[2] On May 19, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement on the part of the victim D’s “E” in the victim’s “E” on the part of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City’s second floor, stating that “The Defendant shall transfer the Kafe, which shall be paid KRW 30 million as the premium for Kafe at once.”

However, in fact, 10 million won is paid to the lessor of the above carpet building, and 10 million won is paid to the lessor of the above carpet building, and there is a claim to be paid from the damaged party.

The plan to refuse payment was merely a plan to assert and refuse payment, and even if the car page was accepted, there was no intention or ability to pay 30 million won to the victim.

The defendant accepted the above car page from the injured party on the same day, and did not pay the premium of KRW 30 million.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired financial benefits by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Legal statements from witnesses D and F;

1. The detailed statement of office monthly rent contracts, the details of transactions of bankbooks, records of recording, celebling costs, and premiums for carpets;

1. Previous conviction: A written reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (a confirmation of the same criminal history as the suspect) [the defendant agreed to pay KRW 20 million, not a KRW 30 million, as premium, when accepting E (hereinafter “the instant car page”) from D, and the above premium amounting to KRW 9.5 million, out of KRW 20 million, shall be paid directly to D, and the remaining money shall be paid by the defendant at the expense of G’s grain through D account.

It argues that all premium with D was paid by an agreement to set off the remainder of KRW 13 million after deducting the final agreement of KRW 2 million from the total amount of KRW 15 million, and that there was no deception by the victim.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the defendant and D are between the parties.