A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

The defendant shall pay 83,00,000 won to the applicant for compensation by deceit.

3.2

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who conducts real estate development business under the trade name of “stock company E” in Geum-gu, Busan Metropolitan City.

Around July 20, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C, stating that “The purchase of three parcels, including G Ha, G, etc., G, G, and 200 million won is necessary. If the Defendant borrowed KRW 200 million, the Defendant would have repaid KRW 250 million after six months, and would have the establishment of the collateral security two times in the above I’s land registry.”

However, the facts are that the defendant paid to the victim KRW 250 million after six months, and there was no intention or ability to set up a collateral security on the I land register No. 2.

The Defendant received KRW 200 million from the victim to the Busan Bank account in the name of the above E.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police interrogation protocol and each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol against J;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel in the certificate of borrowing, letter, certificate of deposit without passbook, real estate sales contract, and copy of the register

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the purport that on July 20, 2010, the defendant did not lend KRW 200 million to the victim, but the defendant was scheduled to receive approximately KRW 450 million of the remaining purchase and sale price of KRW 1.98 billion to Samsung Greenton Co., Ltd. on or around November 2010, since he was scheduled to receive approximately KRW 450 million of the remaining purchase and sale price of KRW 1.98 billion, the defendant's defense counsel was planning to receive and repay the defendant's debt, but he was not able to receive the above price due to unexpected reconstruction costs and provisional attachment, etc., and it was merely a failure to pay the above price according to the wind promise not to receive it.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion ultimately denies the criminal intent of defraudation.