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 became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 10, 2008, the criminal defendant against the victim C calls the victim C to a place where it is impossible to identify a place of light on February 10, 2008, and there is insufficient deposit money to move to and from work as a director near the workplace.

The phrase “a deposit is borrowed prior to the entry of bond money after the 10th day of the same month,” which was remitted from the injured party who believed it on the 15th day of the same month to the national bank account (D) in the name of the injured party used at the time of borrowing KRW 18.6 million.

However, the defendant was operated around that time.

Because there was no particular income after the closure of the operation center, and there was a need to pay 10 million won or more in one month of the interest on the bonds, the plan was planned to use the money borrowed from the injured party as the interest on the bonds and the paid-in living expenses, and there was no intention or ability to pay the money in return.

In addition, from around that time to April 7, 2008, the Defendant received a total of KRW 57,650,000 from the injured party to the same account as a loan borrowed money without the ability or intent to repay, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

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

2. Since the victim E had a bad property condition as stated in paragraph 1, the defrauded had no intent or ability to pay the price properly even if the goods were purchased from others.

A. On March 14, 2008, the Defendant: (a) at an “G” agency operated by the victim E in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu; and (b) at the victim’s “G” agency operated by Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu; and (c) would transfer the price to the victim within one month if the cosmetics

Recognizing to the purport that “A cosmetic was de facto 660,000 won or more at the market price from the injured party who believed this fact.”

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

B. On March 17, 2008, the Defendant, at the place specified in the foregoing paragraph A, shall be the victim.