Defendant is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of the No. 1 and No. 3 and No. 4 for the crime of the annexed crime list No. 2.

Punishment of the crime

On July 20, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at a credit branch of the Suwon District Court, and completed the execution of the sentence on January 17, 2013. On January 11, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for fraud in the credit branch of the Suwon District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on April 29, 2016, and completed the execution of the sentence on May 9, 2016.

On December 7, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D, “At the notarial office located in the third floor of the notarial office in Echeon-si B building, the Defendant borrowed KRW 15 million,00,000,000,000,000,000 won, which reduces the construction volume of housing units in E, F, G, and H.”

However, in fact, the Defendant failed to complete the purchase of the above land, and it was impossible to perform housing construction works on the above land due to the lack of water supply and drainage facilities, so the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to sign

Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim as above, received a sum of KRW 23 million from the time to July 12, 2017, including the receipt of KRW 15 million in cash and cash from the victim as a temporary loan loan, as well as the receipt of KRW 23 million from that time to July 12, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D;

1. A complaint filed in D;

1. Unauthorized statements of disposition and reports on the results of confirmation - Attachment of written judgments;

1. Application of statutes concerning criminal records;

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

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the treatment of concurrent crimes ( space between the judgments finalized on April 29, 2016 and the facts of crime 1 and 2);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the fact that the reason for sentencing Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act is recognized and reflected among the concurrent crimes shall be considered as favorable circumstances. However, the fact that the same crime is a repeated crime, the amount of damage is not repaid, etc. shall be considered disadvantageous circumstances.

In this regard, all the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, character, behavior and environment, are determined as above.