A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Around July 15, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C to the effect that “in the instant case, the Defendant had several Korean-style houses in the middle-gu Seoul Central District Doctrine, discovered and process all the procedures, including building permission, and changed the 24 square Korean-style houses to KRW 250,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, without molding until February 29, 2012.”

However, even if the defendant received the construction cost from the victim, the defendant had no intention or ability to undertake the construction work of Hanok as agreed upon by the victim because he thought that he would repay the accumulated personal debt.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 75 million from the victim as the Korea-style Building Construction Contract Deposit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statements of each prosecutor's office and police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A copy of a construction work contract;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to E works site photographs;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Although the alleged defendant received 75 million won from the victim as the down payment of construction, the construction was interrupted after the victim received 75 million won. However, according to the construction contract, it is only impossible to complete the removal of the existing building and horizontal work, but it is only impossible to do so due to unexpected circumstances, and it does not intend to acquire money by deceiving the victim from the beginning

2. Determination

A. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history before and after the crime, the environment, the contents of the crime, the process of performing transactions, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Do2048 delivered on October 21, 1994). B.

Top, this Court has duly adopted it.