A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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

[Criminal record] On November 27, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court) and two years of suspended execution, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 1, 2016.

[2] According to the criminal facts, the Defendant: (a) purchased a vehicle at KRW 22,00,00,00,000, and delivered the vehicle to the Defendant by September 10, 2014; (b) on August 11, 2014, the Namyang-si Police Station D (hereinafter “Seoul-si Police Station”); and (c) on August 11, 2014, the Defendant merely intended to pay the credit amount of the vehicle part to be paid by the Defendant with the said money even if he/she received money as the down payment for the vehicle rent from the victim E; and (d) despite having no intent or ability to purchase the vehicle to purchase the vehicle with the victim at a lower level than the market price, the Defendant purchased the vehicle from the victim via F to deliver the vehicle to the Defendant by September 10, 2014, in the name of the Defendant’s bank, including KRW 1300,000,000,00,00 from the damaged car under the name of the down payment for the vehicle.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim to take the property by deceiving the victim.

"2015 Highest 4680"

1. On August 8, 2014, the Defendant: (a) in the Taekwondo chapter operated by the victim I of H 201 in the Namyang-si, Gyeonggi-do; (b) the victim “K” in the “J” letter operated by the victim I; and (c) the vehicle of the vehicle of the Gatoto Cine Services Center is a staff member; (d) the new car will purchase the vehicle at a discounted price of 36% compared to the fixed price and at a discounted price; and (e) the Defendant would purchase the down payment and the black box fee at a discounted price of 70%. In addition, the Defendant would purchase the vehicle of the Ka to purchase it at a discounted price of 70%.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, the defendant only thought that he/she would receive money from the injured party and repay other debts, and because he/she is not an employee of the above service center, the above vehicle or the above at the discounted price.