A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On June 9, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the Defendant’s home located in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do, that “The Defendant would pay off money to the victim D at a prompt time if he/she lends money to the victim D.”

In fact, the Defendant did not properly pay monthly wages of the employees due to the lack of any income accrued at the time, and even if he borrowed money from the damaged party due to the absence of any specific property, he did not have the intent or ability to pay such money.

As above, the Defendant was issued KRW 5 million in total on four occasions, such as deceiving the victim as above and receiving KRW 5 million in total from the victim as a check on June 16, 2009, KRW 5 million in cash on August 3, 2009, and KRW 5 million in our bank account (E) with the Defendant’s name around November 9, 2009.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A paper related to borrowed money and fraternity money, a detailed statement of passbook, a detailed statement of transaction, and a statement of deposit in the name of husband of the victim;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reports;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to ten years; and

2. Where a person intentionally commits a deceptive act in the mitigated area (one month to one year) (special mitigated person) of Class 1 (less than 100 million won) in the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, or where the degree of the deceptive act is weak;

3. The fact that the defendant did not pay the money obtained by deceit for a long period of time is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, it appears that the injured party was aware of the fact that he was stuffed by the defendant, and the defendant agreed to pay the borrowed money in this case instead of receiving KRW 10 million from the number fraternity operated by the injured party.