Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and for four months, respectively.

However, from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. The sole criminal conduct of Defendant A;

A. On May 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 15:00 on the early May 2013, 2013, at a restaurant located in the Macheon-dong Fisheries Market, Taecheon-gu, Daegu (Seoul) Seocheon-gu; (b) the Defendant leased the victim D with the money of KRW 30 million as the money would be to come to Kim Ged at a good place in Ulsan-do; and (c) the Defendant would pay the money by the end of the next year on the receipt of dividends, on the ground that the land in the Gawa is disposed of, and the money would have been distributed to him.

“A false statement” was made.

However, in fact, there was no fact that the sale of the land in the “E” door to which the Defendant belongs, and there was no room for paying KRW 100 million to the Defendant in relation to the sale of the land in the above sentence, and at the time, there was no intention or ability to change the above as promised even if the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged party due to the excess of the obligation without

However, on May 22, 2013, Defendant 1, as seen above, received each of the following amounts of KRW 10 million from the Defendant’s new cooperation account in the name of the Defendant and KRW 20 million from the same account around the 31st day of the same month to receive KRW 30 million in total from the same account in the name of the Defendant.

B. On October 25, 2013, the Defendant: (a) from around 15:00 to around 15:00 on October 25, 2013, the Defendant: (b) phone phone called to the victim D; and (c) the victim “The president of the Gab Kim Han-si, the president of the Gabb, now, went away.”

The card value should be immediately prevented, and 10 million won should be loaned. It is possible to repay the amount of 30 million won, which has been lent to the ground before receiving dividends of 100 million won in December of this year.

“A false statement” was made.

However, as stated in the above Paragraph 1-A, there is no room for the Defendant to pay KRW 100 million to the Defendant with respect to the sale of the land in the door, and at the time, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to make a change as agreed, even if he borrowed money from the injured party in excess of his obligation without any specific import.

However, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and is in the same position as the victim.