A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

Punishment of the crime

On September 4, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court and two years of suspended execution, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 12, 2014.

The Defendant, from December 2, 2006 to February 2, 2013, is a person who served as a sales employee of F Co., Ltd. who supplies scarf, handouts, locks, etc. to the above store at D’s “E” store located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

From the middle half of 2007, the Defendant used the fact that the above department store and the above company did not accurately investigate the quantity of stocks in fact, and opened a "dumping business" in the name of acquiring the difference, without registering part of the goods that the above company stored in the above department store as inventory of the above department store, and selling them individually at prices below 15 to 30% of the sales price of the department store and paying part of the sales price to the above company, without registering as inventory of the above department store.

The Defendant loaned money from his son, while carrying out the dumping business as above, did not gain any profit therefrom. From April 2010, the Defendant began to enter into a “prevention from returning money,” referring to the repeated lending of money from many people to repay the principal and interest of the borrowed money to take dumping goods.

1. On October 26, 2010, the Defendant committed the crime against Victim G with the intent that “A victim G, who is a sales employee of other stores in the above department store, will pay a fee of 15% per month when making an investment in disposing of dumping goods, shall be paid,” under the approval of the above department store, to the effect that “A victim G, who is an employee of other stores in the above department store, would normally engage in the above dumping business with the approval of the above department store.”

However, the defendant tried to use most of the money received from the injured party as investment money in preventing the above return of the money, and there was no intention or ability to pay fees to the injured party or return the investment money due to the lack of profits from the above dumping business.

The defendant is the victim as above.