A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, from August 2012 to November 2012, 2012, recommended the victim B to make an investment in the "C" Japanese urban development project operated by the Defendant, and invested KRW 32 million from the damaged party, but failed to pay the profits properly, the Defendant was requested to return the principal invested by the injured party around July 18, 2013, and the victim should enter the victim in order to return the investment money to the victim at around July 18, 2013.

In order to increase the franchise store, it was false that the fund will be financed rapidly, and if the fund is more invested, the principal of the investment, etc. in the revenue shall be paid.

However, in fact, the Defendant had already failed to normally operate the above urban development business at the above time, had been in arrears with wages of approximately KRW 20 million to workers, and had not been paid the price due to the fact that he was supplied food for the urban development business but failed to pay the price accordingly, so there was no intention or ability to pay the profit by normally running the business even if he received the money from the injured party.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received 20 million won from the injured party to the Saemaul Treasury account in the name of the Defendant on the same day.

In this respect, the Defendant acquired pecuniary benefits by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Three copies of each police statement made in relation to B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on transaction details;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had the same criminal history, and the scope of damage is not small.

However, the fact that the defendant is late against the defendant, the fact that the injured party agrees with the victim in a smooth agreement, etc. shall be taken into consideration in favor of the defendant.

(b) other.