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

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. Fraud against victim D;

A. On November 20, 2009, the Defendant offered to the victim as security a promissory note with a face value of 25,300,000,000 issued by G, the Defendant stated to the effect that “this Promissory note is a clear note that has been paid at the cost of the payment. It is necessary for the Corporation to construct a commercial building at home and at home, and the money to be used for the Corporation is necessary to construct a commercial building at home and at home. That is, if money is lent, it will be repaid three months after the loan.”

However, in fact, the Defendant planned the said I to pay the money received from the victim upon H and I’s request for the discount of the said bill as a discount for the bill, and the said Daisan Development Corporation was unable to obtain permission, and it was impossible to develop the said tinsan Development Corporation was also unable to obtain permission, and even if it borrowed money from the victim, the Defendant did not intend to use the said tinsan Development Corporation or the party-based commercial building construction and did not have any intent or ability to pay the money to the victim at once.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 22 million from the victim as the borrowed money on the same day.

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

B. On March 22, 2010, the Defendant stated that “The Promissory Notes shall be the Promissory Notes received by the Corporation, and shall be repaid if money is lent to the Corporation,” while offering to the victim as collateral a promissory note with a face value of KRW 72 million, which is equivalent to the face value issued by the J Company.”

However, the facts are that the defendant is responsible for taking the bill issued by the J company from the above I as security and the above I.

At the request of the court to recover bills offered as security, and as such, the Daisan Development Corporation was unable to do so due to the permission issue, and only plans for construction of the commercial building are planned.