A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was the representative director of E Company, who was a company selling Sweden’s environment measuring instruments in Korea, with exclusive sales rights to D company products in Korea, and was aware of the victim F after being introduced from around February 2015.

On March 23, 2015, the Defendant, at the H office for the operation of the victim located in Gyeonggi-gu G in Gyeonggi-gu, has the victim’s exclusive right to sell “D's products with domestic monopoly.”

E After entering into a contract for acquisition of a stock company, the representative of H(H) who is a new corporation is in charge of trust, and the above exclusive sales right is transferred to H(H) corporation, and the business was defective at the same time.

However, in fact, the above exclusive sales right is a non-transferable right, and at the time, the defendant did not obtain any approval from D company in relation to the above transfer, so there was no ability to transfer the above exclusive sales right to the victim.

The Defendant entered into an underwriting contract with the victim on March 25, 2015, and received a total of KRW 100 million from around that time to April 20, 2015 as the down payment.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness F, I and J;

1. The acceptance contract;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of 3 copies of receipts;

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. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution and the agreement is not reached, and the victim has made a considerable effort to acquire the right to sell D's monopolys by acquiring the right to sell D's monopolys. However, the victim, who was a part of the sales sector of the flat environment measurement machine, was ultimately holding the right to sell D's monopolys while paying only KRW 100 million out of KRW 250 million as specified in the contract, as a result, is not significant damage to the victim.

The defendant appears to be of the same kind or depository.