A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
On September 5, 2014, the Defendant issued a false statement to the victim C to the effect that “The removal is ordered after acquiring the ownership of the building located in Seoul from D, and the removal is ordered after obtaining the ownership of the building located in D, and the removal is intended to be ordered to be ordered to be ordered to be ordered to be removed as a hotel of Acaria. In the future, the written subcontract is to be prepared. However, the D representative E must make a business trip in Japan, and the expenses are provided to Japan, and the Defendant borrowed KRW 6 million. When E returns to Japan, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The payment is to be made immediately.”
However, in fact, the ownership of the building could not be transferred in D, and because E did not have any plan to return to Korea with 5 billion won, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to return the above borrowed money.
The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received a total of 31 million won from the victim, including six million won on the same day, and twenty-five million won on the 18th day of the same month, from the victim, in total, via a passbook in the name of the Defendant.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each police statement protocol to C and G;
1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment with labor, inclusive, with respect to the relevant criminal facts;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the crime of this case constitutes the basic area (6 months to 16 months) of the type of general fraud (less than KRW 100 million).
In light of the contents, method, etc. of the criminal defendant's deceptive act, but it shall be taken into consideration the fact that the defendant makes efforts for the repayment of damage, reflects the fact, and has no record of punishment heavier than the fine.