The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On August 1, 2018, the Defendant, in Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, 2018, concluded that “C is operating an automobile repair business entity in the name of “C” with the employees F of E Co., Ltd., a vehicle dealer operated by the victim D. The vehicle owner, who is an accident vehicle, shall repair and sell the said vehicle within 15 days from the date of deposit in advance.”

However, in fact, even if the defendant did not own the above U.S. vehicle and received the vehicle price from the victim, he was thought to use it as the purchase price, living expenses, and payment of existing debts of other vehicles, etc., and he did not have the intent or ability to sell it to the victim after properly repairing the said vehicle.

On August 1, 2017, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) transferred KRW 36.5 million to the Defendant’s account in the name of his wife in the name of his wife on August 1, 2017; and (c) transferred KRW 16.5 million to the same account on October 14 of the same year in the name of the sales proceeds of the nibus vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant received a total of KRW 53 million from the victim as the sales proceeds of vehicles twice in total.

"2018 Highest 2904"

1. On November 2017, the Defendant, who committed a crime against the Victim J, made a false statement to the victim that “When sending KRW 29 million to B, the Defendant would have purchased and repaired the BMW428 vehicle from an insurance company in which the accident was in progress, and would have to do so after purchasing it from the insurance company.”

However, in fact, even if the Defendant did not have any special property due to bad credit standing at the time and received money from the victim, it was thought that he would use the vehicle as the purchase price of another vehicle, and thus, he did not intend or have ability to sell the vehicle to the victim

As above, the defendant deceivings the victim and belongs to it.