A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On January 27, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months of imprisonment with prison labor for occupational embezzlement at the Suwon Friwon, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 4, 2016.

【Criminal facts” The Defendant: (a) was a person engaged in real estate development business; (b) borrowed KRW 150 million from the victim B to resolve overdue taxes and bank interest on July 10, 2012; and (c) made a joint security of the aforementioned loan amount as to the land D and E in the official name of the Defendant for the payment of the loan amount; (d) around August 3, 2012, the Defendant set up a mortgage on the maximum amount of claims KRW 200 million against the victim; and (e) after the Defendant’s failure to pay interest, etc., each voluntary auction of the said land on the two parcels of forest land was conducted on January 2013, 2013, the Defendant stated to the effect that “I would dispose of the said forest and repay the amount of the loan with the proceeds thereof.”

On February 4, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “the Defendant would give money by concluding a contract at the right time of termination of the right to collateral security by telephone to the victim,” and that “the Defendant would give money by entering into a contract at the time of termination of the right to collateral security at the certified judicial scrivener office in charge,” and that “the Defendant would give money by entering into a contract at the time of termination of the right to collateral security.”

However, it was difficult to conclude a sales contract on the two parcels of forest land as the seizure and senior mortgage were established, and there was only a person visiting to avoid the conclusion of a sales contract, and there was no negotiation that can be viewed as the scheduled conclusion of a sales contract on the condition that the victim's right was cancelled.

As above, the Defendant: (a) obtained the victim’s consent to the termination of the right to collateral security on February 5, 2013 by deceiving the victim; and (b) obtained the victim’s consent to the termination of the right to collateral security on the same day from the injured party; and (c) obtained the cancellation of the right to collateral security on or around February 5, 2013; and (d) equivalent to KRW 150 million to the amount of the