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

Punishment of the crime

On December 8, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Western District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 6, 2012.

Around March 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the (ju) C Office operated by the Defendant in the second 816th of the building B in Geumcheon-gu Seoul, Geumcheon-gu, that “The principal representative director of the victim D (the head) will pay the prime unit price by the end of the following day on the face of supplying the prime unit.”

However, in fact, the above company did not make any sale at the end of 2009, and the assets were in excess of obligations, and the company did not normally operate such assets as corporate tax, value-added tax, overdue wages for employees, etc., so even if the company was supplied with the original amount from the victim, there was no intention or ability to pay the original amount to the victim.

Around March 31, 2010, the Defendant, by deceiving E as such, obtained KRW 28,684,440 equivalent to the market price of KRW 28,64,440 from E and acquired KRW 20 to KRW 3,749.6km, and acquired KRW 169,494,700 in total over 19 times from around that time to May 29, 2010 as shown in the annexed crime list.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement E in the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. A complaint, tax invoice, settlement statement, each packing statement, detailed statement of transaction, raw material order, and business registration certificate;

1. Investigation report (specific amount of damage from primary transactions of the complainant E);

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records and investigation reports (written judgment and report on confirmation of the fixed date);

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

1. The fact that the reasons for sentencing under the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act are larger and most of the damages have not been recovered, and the defendant is supplied with the original body similar to the crime of this case and did not pay the price, as stated in the judgment in fraud.